In Brief
The appellants sought specific performance of agreements for sale of property from 1980. The trial court granted the decree, but the High Court reversed it, finding the agreements were not genuine and that the plaintiff had not proved extension of time or readiness to perform. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision that the plaintiff failed to establish either time extension or willingness to complete the sale, and could not obtain specific performance. However, recognizing that earnest money had been retained since 1980, the Court awarded compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs to the appellants, distinguishing this from the specific performance prayer.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.