https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395071 Specific performance was refused because the written agreement was held uncertain in essential terms: the land description, boundaries, area and supporting particulars were inadequate, and the uncertainty could not be cured by pleadings or oral evidence. The transaction was also treated as benami, as the plaintiff failed to prove the source of funds and appeared to act as a name lender, making the arrangement unenforceable. Continuous readiness and willingness was not established, since the plaintiff did not comply with the payment schedule or prove timely tender. Costs were also awarded in favour of defendants 4 and 5. en-us Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 May 2020 08:20:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395071 Specific performance was refused because the written agreement was held uncertain in essential terms: the land description, boundaries, area and supporting particulars were inadequate, and the uncertainty could not be cured by pleadings or oral evidence. The transaction was also treated as benami, as the plaintiff failed to prove the source of funds and appeared to act as a name lender, making the arrangement unenforceable. Continuous readiness and willingness was not established, since the plaintiff did not comply with the payment schedule or prove timely tender. Costs were also awarded in favour of defendants 4 and 5. Case-Laws Benami Property Mon, 16 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395071