(delivering the Judgment of the Court): We allowed the appeal with costs both here and the court below and set aside the judgment and ordered the refund of the deposit to the appellants. We did not deal with the counterclaim as it was abandoned. We stated that we would give our reasons later. We do so now.

The appeal is basically a question of construction of clauses 2 and 6 of an agreement entered into by the parties on December 29, 1972. Appellants agreed to sell to the respondents a portion comprised 61,050.0 square feet of their land in Kuala Lumpur described as Lot No. 162, section 63 for $167,889.98. Respondents paid a deposit of 10% as earnest money and the balance of the purchase price was to be paid within 30 days of the appellants' notifying the respondents of obtaining two separate titles in continuation for the land. At the time of the execution of the agreement the appellants had already applied for the development of a petrol-filling and service station on the land as evidenced by the Development Order dated February 19, 1971 (see page 44 of the Appeal Record) issued by the Pegawai Peranchang. Prior to the agreement the appellants had already a