https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171865 An instrument described as an agreement for sale, reflecting negotiated terms, execution by both parties and attesting witnesses, and a default clause quantifying breach consequences, was treated as an agreement to sell rather than a loan transaction. The Court also held that specific performance could not be refused merely because property prices had risen, where the agreement was valid, the parties had acted upon it, and the defendant had not promptly shown it to be sham or nominal. On those findings, discretionary relief was properly exercised in favour of enforcement and the decree for specific performance was sustained. en-us Tue, 20 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 23 Nov 2015 19:10:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171865 An instrument described as an agreement for sale, reflecting negotiated terms, execution by both parties and attesting witnesses, and a default clause quantifying breach consequences, was treated as an agreement to sell rather than a loan transaction. The Court also held that specific performance could not be refused merely because property prices had risen, where the agreement was valid, the parties had acted upon it, and the defendant had not promptly shown it to be sham or nominal. On those findings, discretionary relief was properly exercised in favour of enforcement and the decree for specific performance was sustained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 20 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171865