2009(2) Property Law Decisions 162(Kar). Karnataka High Court
Sec 16(c) & 20. Specific performance. Suit for Agreement specifically mentioning date before which transaction to be completed. Hence, it cannot be said that time was not the essence of contract. Defendant entering into agreement for raising funds for education of his son. Plaintiff stating that it was defendan who posponed registration by one year, cannot be believed. Evidence of defendant showing that plaintiff committed brech of contract. Plaintiff not seriously disputing evidence of defendant. Time also not being extended at any timne. No edorsement made in this behalf. Plaintifff not entittled to relief.
