Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Appeal Denied: Overdue Payments Impact Agreement Terms</h1> <h3>Shanmugam Pillai and others Versus Annalakshmi Ammal and others</h3> Shanmugam Pillai and others Versus Annalakshmi Ammal and others - TMI Issues Involved:1. Nature of the transaction: Mortgage by conditional sale vs. outright sale.2. Specific performance of the agreement for resale.3. Waiver of forfeiture due to delayed payments.4. Legal effect of acceptance of overdue payments.5. Relief against forfeiture under equitable principles.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Nature of the Transaction: Mortgage by Conditional Sale vs. Outright SaleThe appellants argued that the three documents executed in January 1937 constituted a mortgage by conditional sale. However, the respondents contended that the sale was outright and absolute. The Subordinate Judge held that due to the proviso in Section 58(c) of the Transfer of Property Act, the claim for redemption on the footing of a mortgage by conditional sale was unsustainable. This view was not questioned in the High Court or before the Federal Court, and the claim for redemption was not pressed.2. Specific Performance of the Agreement for ResaleThe appellants sought specific performance of the agreement to resell, arguing that the payments of installments due under the lease were irregular and belated but were accepted by the lessor, thus waiving the delay. The Subordinate Judge found that the belated payments were accepted by the lessor, thereby waiving the delay, and thus the appellants were entitled to specific performance. However, the High Court held that the acceptance of rent after the due date did not affect the terms of the agreement to reconvey, as the terms of the lease and the agreement stood apart. The High Court dismissed the suit for specific performance.3. Waiver of Forfeiture Due to Delayed PaymentsThe appellants argued that the acceptance of overdue installments by the lessor without reservation amounted to a waiver of the forfeiture of the lease and the agreement alike. The Subordinate Judge agreed, finding that the lessor waived the delay by accepting the belated payments. However, the High Court held that the acceptance of rent after the due date did not amount to a waiver of the conditions of the agreement for resale.4. Legal Effect of Acceptance of Overdue PaymentsThe High Court relied on the decision in Bastin v. Bidwell, holding that the acceptance of overdue payments did not affect the terms of the agreement for resale. The Federal Court, however, distinguished Bastin v. Bidwell, noting that the acceptance of overdue payments without reservation could amount to a waiver of the forfeiture of the agreement. The Federal Court found that the lessor's acceptance of payments after the due dates, without any reservation, indicated a waiver of the forfeiture.5. Relief Against Forfeiture Under Equitable PrinciplesThe Federal Court considered whether the appellants could seek relief against forfeiture under equitable principles. The Court noted that where a penalty or forfeiture is designed merely as a security to enforce the principal obligation, equity will relieve against such forfeiture if the other party is adequately compensated. The Court found that the forfeiture clause in the agreement was in the nature of a penalty designed to secure the due payment of the installments payable under the lease. The Court held that the appellants were entitled to relief against forfeiture and specific performance of the agreement for resale.Conclusion:The Federal Court, by a majority, dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellants were not entitled to specific performance of the agreement for resale. However, the dissenting judges opined that the appellants were entitled to relief against forfeiture and specific performance of the agreement. The appeal was dismissed with costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found