https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289480 The High Court held that the document presented did not constitute a concluded agreement for leasing the third floor of a building. The terms were deemed too uncertain to be formalized into a lease, with the clause "subject to the conditions and entering into a regular lease" indicating a lack of definite agreement. The court found the document to be a result of preliminary negotiations, lacking the necessary specificity for specific performance. The appeal was allowed, and the suit dismissed with costs. The court directed the defendants to apply for retention of the deposit under Section 144 of the Civil Procedure Code within a specified timeframe. en-us Fri, 03 Mar 1922 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Aug 2020 16:05:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289480 The High Court held that the document presented did not constitute a concluded agreement for leasing the third floor of a building. The terms were deemed too uncertain to be formalized into a lease, with the clause "subject to the conditions and entering into a regular lease" indicating a lack of definite agreement. The court found the document to be a result of preliminary negotiations, lacking the necessary specificity for specific performance. The appeal was allowed, and the suit dismissed with costs. The court directed the defendants to apply for retention of the deposit under Section 144 of the Civil Procedure Code within a specified timeframe. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 03 Mar 1922 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289480