https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310561 The SC set aside the HC's order granting an extension for the payment of the second installment by defendant No. 9, rejecting the application for extension due to the defendant's conduct and delay. The court upheld the validity of the compromise agreement, stating that the penal clause was not punitive but a condition of the agreement. It found that the plaintiffs were not given a reasonable opportunity to contest the defendant's extension request. The appeal was allowed, with costs awarded to the appellants. en-us Fri, 18 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Oct 2023 17:05:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310561 The SC set aside the HC's order granting an extension for the payment of the second installment by defendant No. 9, rejecting the application for extension due to the defendant's conduct and delay. The court upheld the validity of the compromise agreement, stating that the penal clause was not punitive but a condition of the agreement. It found that the plaintiffs were not given a reasonable opportunity to contest the defendant's extension request. The appeal was allowed, with costs awarded to the appellants. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 18 Mar 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310561