https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296120 Proof of a sale agreement was accepted where direct testimony from the plaintiff and an attesting witness, together with corroborative bank and conduct evidence, established execution despite a forgery defence. Although a minor's undivided interest in joint family property may not always require prior court permission for alienation, the parties had expressly stipulated that such permission was needed, so the agreement could not be enforced against the minors without it. The first defendant's withdrawal of the guardianship proceeding amounted to contractual frustration, but specific performance was refused on equitable grounds because of delay, changed property values, and hardship to the minors. Restitution of the advance with interest was treated as the appropriate relief. en-us Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jul 2021 12:56:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296120 Proof of a sale agreement was accepted where direct testimony from the plaintiff and an attesting witness, together with corroborative bank and conduct evidence, established execution despite a forgery defence. Although a minor's undivided interest in joint family property may not always require prior court permission for alienation, the parties had expressly stipulated that such permission was needed, so the agreement could not be enforced against the minors without it. The first defendant's withdrawal of the guardianship proceeding amounted to contractual frustration, but specific performance was refused on equitable grounds because of delay, changed property values, and hardship to the minors. Restitution of the advance with interest was treated as the appropriate relief. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=296120