Indeed, we are inclined to think that the rigor of the rule evolved by courts that time is not of the essence of the contract in the case of immovable properties - evolved in times when prices and values were stable and inflation was unknown - requires to be relaxed, if not modified, particularly in the case of urban immovable properties. It is high time, we do so. .....

[1997 (3) SCC 1 (K.S.Vidyanandam and others v. Vairavan)

“I do not know” - is the answer given by the owner of the property, (D1/D.W.1), when he was asked to comment upon the question as to whether the plaintiff, who is seeking the relief of specific performance of the agreement, was always ready, able and willing to purchase the suit property.

2. Whether this nebulous answer could be construed as amounting to an admission that the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract so far as the agreement is concerned or would it imply that he was not ready and willing.

3. Based upon the sale agreement, dated 23.09.2005, the plaintiff is seeking the relief of specific performance as aga