Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether a court can grant equitable relief against forfeiture and enforce a covenant for reconveyance when the beneficiary has failed to comply strictly with the conditions on which the right to reconveyance was made exercisable.
Analysis: The sale deed, the covenant for reconveyance, and the rent note formed one transaction, but the right to demand reconveyance was only a concession subject to strict conditions. The beneficiary had to exercise the option within two years and keep the rent arrears below the stipulated limit. Equity may relieve against penalties where the object is merely to secure payment of money or performance of an act, but that principle does not apply where a contract confers a beneficial right only upon performance of the stipulated conditions in the stated manner and within the stated time. In such a case, absent fraud, accident, or surprise, equity does not relieve against the breach.
Conclusion: The right to reconveyance could not be specifically enforced in favour of the plaintiff, and no equitable relief against forfeiture was available.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a beneficial contractual right is made exercisable only on strict compliance with stipulated conditions, failure to satisfy those conditions defeats the right and equity will not grant relief against the resulting forfeiture.