ISHWARBHAI NARSINHBHAI PATEL Vs. RAMBHAI DAHYABHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) If there was no hurdle created by the Income-tax authorities and if the plaintiff did not pay the amount within stipulated time it was open for the defendants to inform the plaintiff that breach was committed in regard to the contract. Here there was no question of breach because this was never committed by any of the parties. Both the parties were willing to complete the transaction which they could not complete because of the circumstances beyond their control and, therefore, they by mutual conduct extended the time and, therefore, we have to count the date on which the plaintiff realised that the defendants did not desire to complete the contract. Now that date is admittedly 26-8-1971. On that day the defendants decided that they desired not to complete the transaction. Notice was given which was perhaps on the next day, that is, at the earliest it could be on 27-8-1971. Within three years thereafter the suit was filed on 26-8-1974. The suit, therefore, was within time.