2009 AIR SCW 6561 ::2010 (2) AIR Jhar R 366 ::(2009) 4 CivilCourtC 119 ::2009 (8) SCC 743 ::(2009) 4 RecCivR 181 ::(2009) 11 Scale 388 ::(2010) 1 MPLJ 525 ::(2010) 2 Mah LJ 15 ::AIR 2009 SC (Supp) 2927

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Delhi)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): Satya Brata Sinha, Deepak Verma , JJ

(A) Contract Act (9 of 1872) , S.55— Time whether essence of contract - Provision in MOU between parties fixing certain date for payment by respondent to appellant - However, with intention to give further leverage to respondent time was made extendable by 10 to 20 days and not more and that too only with consent of parties - Held, time was essence of contract. C.M. No.1276 of 2005 and R. F. A. No. 649 of 2004, D/-8-9-2008 (Delhi), Reversed. (Para 28 29) (B) Specific Relief Act (47 of 1963) , S.16(c)— 'Ready and willing' - Originals of pay orders never tendered to appellant and only photocopies were sent to make semblance that respondent has been ready and willing to perform his part of contract - Readiness and willingness of party cannot be inferred in such case - Mere show of readiness and willingness would not discharge obligation resting on one of parties unless it is shown to be real and genuine - More so, when from conduct, behaviour and attitude of respondent it was clearly made out that he had not been ready and willing to perform his part of contract. (Para 30 31) .....