[1] The central issue in the appellant's claim against the 1st and 2nd respondents, who are the receivers & managers [R&M] of the 3rd respondent, is whether there is a concluded contract between the parties upon which the appellant can validly launch its claim for the primary relief of specific performance. The appellant answered the poser in the affirmative, relying specifically, on the R&M's letter dated 17 October 2011 sent to the appellant. The respondents, on the other hand, dispute the existence of any concluded contract, arguing that at best, that letter contained their counter-offer.

[2] The appellant sued the respondents for specific performance and various other remedies when the R&M refused to complete the contract of sale. Pending resolution of its claim, the appellant lodged a caveat on the properties which fo