The vendor was not obliged to send the title deeds without a request from the purchaser and the purchaser's failure to make a request or to approve the title within the time limit entitled the vendor to cancel the agreement.

( 1 ) THIS is a purchaser's appeal from a decree refusing specific performance of an agreement for sare of immoveable property dated December 15, 1954. The learned trial Judge found that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement at all relevant times and that the agreement for sale was duly cancelled by the defendant.

( 2 ) THE undisputed facts prior to the date of the suit filed on May 21, 1957 are as follows: The negotiation for the property i. e. premises Nos. 34a and 34b, Amherst Street were carried on between two solicitors namely Mr. Anil Kumar Ghose for the purchaser and Mr. Anil Kumar Dutta for the vendor commencing in the first week of December 1954, The vendor was one Maheswari Bose a Hindu widow, who wanted to sell the property for legal necessity. (After dealing with the correspondence between the solicitors the judgment proceeded to deal with the relevant terms of the draft agreement dated 13-12-1954 ). The terms of the agreement relevant for the purpose of this appeal are as follows:-- (1) The vendor agrees to sell as a Hindu widow the said two properties free from all incumbrances at Rs. 32,000/- out of which Rs. 501/- has been paid by way of earnest and in part payment. (2) The purchase is to be subject to the approval of the vendor's title by the purchaser's attorney Mr. Anil Ghosh provided that the disapproval of the title should not be unreasonable or arbitrary. The purchaser's attorney shall intimate to the vendor's attorney in writing by January 24, 1955 his approval of the vendor's title and power to sell the said laud and premises. In default the vendor will be entitled to cancel the agreement and refund only the earnest money without interest or costs. (3) The balance of the price shall be paid and the purchase shall be completed by February 15, 1955. The vendor shall forthwith deliver the title deeds which are in the possession of the vendor to the purchasers' attorney on his accountable receipt for his inspection. (After stating term (9) which is not material for purposes of this report, the judgment proceeded :)THE word 'purchaser' in the document shall mean, and include himself, his heirs, executors and assigns and nominee or nominees. (After dealing further with the correspondence, the judgment proceeded : )

( 3 ) IN the plaint filed herein, after referring, to the agreement for sale, the purchaser complained that the defendant had in spite, of demands failed and neglected to produce the relevant documents of the title before the solicitor and that he was obliged to complete the investigation of the title by his own labour and exertion on or about December 23, 1956 and being satisfied therewith had called upon the defendant on January 29, 1957 to complete the sale but the latter had wrongfully refused to do so. There was the further usual averment that the plaintiff had been and still was ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement. There is a little inaccuracy in the plaint as regards the terms of the agreement for sale it being stated in paragraph 2 (1) that the defendant would make out a marketable title to the property to the satisfaction of the plaintiff or his solicitor. The written statement was filed on July 16, 1957. In this after referring more fully to the terms of the agreement the defendant charged (I) that neither the plaintiff nor his attorney had taken any steps whatever for investigating the title or intimating to the defendant or her attorney the approval thereof or the defendant's power to sell within the time mentioned in the agreement (2) that the defendant's attorney had called upon the plaintiff through his attorney on or about June 15, 1955 to complete the purchase within seven days with a notice that in default the agreement would be treated as cancelled. The defendant further pleaded that as no steps had been taken to complete the purchase even after the said notice the defendant cancelled the agreement on or about