https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460617 A contract for sale of immovable property expressly made punctual performance essential, so delay defeated the claim for specific performance. The court also found no proof that the buyers wilfully avoided their contractual duty to obtain the required NOC, because the contract placed that obligation on them and the record did not show the alleged statutory requirement was then applicable. The earnest money was not refundable, as the contract treated it as forfeitable on breach and the claimant neither pleaded nor proved that the stipulation was penal rather than a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The agreements were therefore terminated according to their terms and forfeiture was upheld. en-us Wed, 14 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Feb 2025 18:58:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460617 A contract for sale of immovable property expressly made punctual performance essential, so delay defeated the claim for specific performance. The court also found no proof that the buyers wilfully avoided their contractual duty to obtain the required NOC, because the contract placed that obligation on them and the record did not show the alleged statutory requirement was then applicable. The earnest money was not refundable, as the contract treated it as forfeitable on breach and the claimant neither pleaded nor proved that the stipulation was penal rather than a genuine pre-estimate of loss. The agreements were therefore terminated according to their terms and forfeiture was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 14 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460617