In Brief
The appellant sought specific performance of an agreement to purchase 30 acres of land after the seller cancelled it, claiming breach. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of the suit, finding the appellant-buyer failed to act with due diligence by not promptly obtaining necessary public documents (RTC extracts) and only demanding performance after receiving a breach notice. As a businessman-broker, he was expected to complete formalities proactively. However, the Court enhanced the interest rate on the refundable earnest money from 6% to 12% per annum, ordering its full repayment despite denying specific performance."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.