<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1994 (12) TMI 322 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168808</link>
    <description>A purchaser who defaults under a contract making time essential cannot claim refund where the agreement treats the payment as earnest money and expressly permits forfeiture on default; the forfeiture is sustained when the purchaser took possession, failed to perform, and the other side showed loss and prejudice. The note also states that a guardian cannot alienate a minor&#039;s property without prior court permission under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, but that requirement may become unnecessary on the facts where the minor attains majority during the proceedings and elects to abide by the contract. The purchaser could not rely on the minor&#039;s interest to avoid the bargain, and the forfeiture was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2025 18:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=379905" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (12) TMI 322 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168808</link>
      <description>A purchaser who defaults under a contract making time essential cannot claim refund where the agreement treats the payment as earnest money and expressly permits forfeiture on default; the forfeiture is sustained when the purchaser took possession, failed to perform, and the other side showed loss and prejudice. The note also states that a guardian cannot alienate a minor&#039;s property without prior court permission under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956, but that requirement may become unnecessary on the facts where the minor attains majority during the proceedings and elects to abide by the contract. The purchaser could not rely on the minor&#039;s interest to avoid the bargain, and the forfeiture was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168808</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>