https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200273 The appeals arising from a suit for specific performance and pre-emption were dismissed by the Supreme Court. The court upheld the dismissal of the specific performance suit due to non-satisfaction of preliminary conditions in the agreement. It confirmed the decree for possession by pre-emption in favor of respondent No. 1. The court emphasized the technical nature of Mahomedan Law regarding pre-emption demands and the challenges in compliance, suggesting potential legislative intervention. Both parties were directed to bear their own costs, and the judgment highlighted the enforceability of earlier agreements over subsequent ones. en-us Wed, 03 May 1972 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Mar 2018 15:26:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200273 The appeals arising from a suit for specific performance and pre-emption were dismissed by the Supreme Court. The court upheld the dismissal of the specific performance suit due to non-satisfaction of preliminary conditions in the agreement. It confirmed the decree for possession by pre-emption in favor of respondent No. 1. The court emphasized the technical nature of Mahomedan Law regarding pre-emption demands and the challenges in compliance, suggesting potential legislative intervention. Both parties were directed to bear their own costs, and the judgment highlighted the enforceability of earlier agreements over subsequent ones. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 May 1972 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200273