https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197850 Section 28(1) of the Specific Relief Act does not permit rescission of a decree for specific performance merely because the balance consideration was not deposited within the period mentioned for execution of the decree, where the decree itself fixed no payment deadline and no default clause. The Court retains control over the decree, may extend time, and can order rescission only on a clear default or refusal to perform. Delay by the decree holder was not shown to amount to positive non-compliance, especially where substantial payments had already been made and the other side had delayed for years. A later rise in property value could not justify rescission. en-us Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Jul 2021 14:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197850 Section 28(1) of the Specific Relief Act does not permit rescission of a decree for specific performance merely because the balance consideration was not deposited within the period mentioned for execution of the decree, where the decree itself fixed no payment deadline and no default clause. The Court retains control over the decree, may extend time, and can order rescission only on a clear default or refusal to perform. Delay by the decree holder was not shown to amount to positive non-compliance, especially where substantial payments had already been made and the other side had delayed for years. A later rise in property value could not justify rescission. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 01 Nov 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197850