In Brief
A buyer and seller entered into an agreement to sell land for Rs. 1,01,000 per acre, with the seller agreeing to conduct a survey to identify property boundaries before payment. When the seller failed to conduct the survey, the buyer sued for specific performance. The trial and appellate courts found the seller had breached the contract and granted specific performance. The High Court reversed this, finding the buyer had not proved the lack of survey. The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by re-appreciating facts, and that the survey was a condition precedent to the buyer's payment obligation. The court rejected the seller's claim that price appreciation made the decree inequitable, ruling the seller could not benefit from their own wrongdoing. The Supreme Court restored the trial court's judgment granting specific performance.">
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.