Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
R. M. JOSHI, J
Keshav S/o Madhavrao Dhumal – Appellant
Versus
Dnyandeo S/o Shamrao Rajput – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. agreement of sale executed (Para 3) |
| 2. defendant's written statement (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. defendant's contention on delay (Para 6) |
| 4. plaintiffs' support for judgment (Para 7) |
| 5. admission of appeal (Para 8) |
| 6. ownership of suit property (Para 9) |
| 7. time not essence of contract (Para 10 , 11) |
| 8. delay and laches (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 19) |
| 9. appeal dismissed (Para 18) |
JUDGMENT :
2. Parties are referred to as Plaintiffs and Defendant for the sake of convenience.
4. Defendant, by filing written statement, though accepted execution of agreement to sale however, it is denied that he has received amount of Rs. 5,500/- as alleged by Plaintiffs by way of earnest money. It is his specific case that he received only Rs. 2,500/- at the time of execution of the agreement. He further contends that affidavit was obtained by Plaintiffs from Defendant for submission to the competent authority for seeking permission for sale of the suit land. It is denied by Defendant that Plaintiffs have ever approached him with a request to accept balance consideration and on the contrary it is alleged that Defendant was time and again approached the Plaintiffs for payment of consideration, which
Time is not the essence of a contract for sale of immovable property unless expressly stated; mere delay does not bar specific performance if circumstances justify it.
Time is not generally considered the essence of contracts for the sale of immovable property; however, specific circumstances may necessitate its strict enforcement. A valid agreement can only be mod....
Time is generally not considered essence in immovable property contracts; refusal to perform requires consideration of readiness alongside equitable claims for refund.
![Dudala Sarojinamma [died] VS Dudala Rama Prasad](https://cdn.supremetoday.ai/static/img/news-place-holder.png)
(1) Specific performance of agreement of sale –Alternative plea of refund of earnest amount and damage could not be bar to claiming decree for specific Performance of contract.(2) Specific performanc....
The plaintiff's failure to file the suit within the limitation period and to prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract resulted in dismissal of the specific performance claim.
Time is not automatically the essence of a contract unless expressly stated; the plaintiff's readiness and willingness to perform must be established.
Agreement to Sell – Time would remain essence of contract and buyer cannot take unusually long time to fulfil his part of commitment.
In a contract for sale of immovable property, failure to perform within the stipulated time renders the suit for specific performance time-barred under the Limitation Act, as readiness and willingnes....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
