In Brief
A property owner sought specific performance of a reconveyance agreement, claiming a prior sale deed was merely security for a loan. The Supreme Court held that the sale deed constituted an outright sale based on its plain language and recitals, not a nominal security transaction. More critically, the Court found the plaintiff failed to prove he was "ready and willing" to perform his contractual obligation to pay the reconveyance consideration, as mandated by Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act. The plaintiff had no financial means, sought debt relief, and disputed payment terms. The Court restored the trial court's dismissal, rejecting the High Court's reversal.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.