In Brief
A property seller (appellant) sought to rescind a specific performance decree by arguing the buyer (respondent) failed to deposit the balance purchase price within the prescribed two months. The Execution Court extended the time and permitted the deposit. The Supreme Court held that while applications under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act should technically be filed in the original suit rather than execution proceedings, substantial justice was served by allowing the extension. The buyer demonstrated consistent intention to perform despite the seller's repeated appeals delaying matters. No interference was warranted where the decree holder acted in good faith and the order advanced complete justice to both parties.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.