<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (1) TMI 1860 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293747</link>
    <description>Specific performance requires proof of a concluded contract, continuous readiness and willingness to perform, compliance with contractual obligations, and absence of hardship warranting refusal. Concurrent factual findings that the plaintiff was not ready or willing to perform are ordinarily not disturbed in appeal unless perverse, illegal, or unsupported by the record. Failure to establish readiness and willingness defeats both the equitable claim for specific performance and the claimed refund of earnest money.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2021 11:03:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=637586" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 1860 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293747</link>
      <description>Specific performance requires proof of a concluded contract, continuous readiness and willingness to perform, compliance with contractual obligations, and absence of hardship warranting refusal. Concurrent factual findings that the plaintiff was not ready or willing to perform are ordinarily not disturbed in appeal unless perverse, illegal, or unsupported by the record. Failure to establish readiness and willingness defeats both the equitable claim for specific performance and the claimed refund of earnest money.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293747</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>