Topic

condition precedent

6 articlesLatest September 2026
Condition Precedent | Vendor's Failure to Transfer Shares & Reconstitute Board Relieves Purchaser of Payment Obligation; Refund Upheld Under Section 65 Contract Act : Calcutta HC
Case Law Analysis
|Calcutta High Court

Condition Precedent | Vendor's Failure to Transfer Shares & Reconstitute Board Relieves Purchaser of Payment Obligation; Refund Upheld Under Section 65 Contract Act : Calcutta HC

The Division Bench held that the vendor's obligation to transfer 51% shares and reconstitute the board was a condition precedent, so its non-performance discharged the purchaser's payment duty. The purchaser's SMS communication avoiding the contract was lawful, and the vendor's Rs. 5.51 crore damages claim failed for want of proof. The purchaser's Rs. 1 crore advance was refunded under Section 65 of the Contract Act.

Fishing Lease Void Without District Magistrate Approval; Bid Refund Mandatory under U.P. Revenue Code : Allahabad HC
Case Law Analysis
|Allahabad High Court

Fishing Lease Void Without District Magistrate Approval; Bid Refund Mandatory under U.P. Revenue Code : Allahabad HC

The Allahabad High Court ruled that a lease for fishing rights cannot vest without the District Magistrate’s sanction, making the petitioner’s claim for refund of the auction deposit enforceable. This clarifies that the statutory condition precedent under the U.P. Revenue Code overrides any administrative refusal, protecting bidders in government lease auctions.

Condition Precedent Under Section 52 & 54 ICA | Payment Liability Triggers Only Upon Property Handover in Functional Condition : Allahabad HC
Case Law Analysis
|Allahabad High Court

Condition Precedent Under Section 52 & 54 ICA | Payment Liability Triggers Only Upon Property Handover in Functional Condition : Allahabad HC

Allahabad High Court rules that payment obligations under a contract arise solely after fulfillment of a condition precedent-here, the handover of property in a functional state. The judgment reinforces that reciprocal promises under Sections 52 and 54 of the Indian Contract Act are enforceable only upon compliance with agreed prerequisites, impacting contract execution and dispute resolution.

Section 35B CPC | Non-Payment of Costs as Condition Precedent Justifies Striking Off Defence: Himachal Pradesh HC
Case Law Analysis
|Himachal Pradesh High Court

Section 35B CPC | Non-Payment of Costs as Condition Precedent Justifies Striking Off Defence: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that non-payment of costs ordered under Section 35B of the CPC is a valid ground for striking off a defendant’s defence, reinforcing that compliance with cost orders is mandatory, not discretionary. This decision underscores the judiciary’s intolerance for dilatory tactics and ensures procedural discipline in civil litigation.

Section 12(1)(c) Presidency Towns Insolvency Act | Covid-19 Limitation Extension Applies to Time-Bound Insolvency Petitions : Bombay HC
Case Law Analysis
|Bombay High Court

Section 12(1)(c) Presidency Towns Insolvency Act | Covid-19 Limitation Extension Applies to Time-Bound Insolvency Petitions : Bombay HC

Bombay HC rules that the Covid-19 limitation extension applies to the time-bound condition precedent under Section 12(1)(c) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909. The judgment validates insolvency petitions filed during the pandemic, reinforcing the applicability of Supreme Court's limitation extensions to procedural timelines in insolvency proceedings.

Section 77 Registration Act | Execution of Sale Deed Invalid Without Full Consideration Payment : Punjab & Haryana HC
Case Law Analysis
|Punjab and Haryana High Court

Section 77 Registration Act | Execution of Sale Deed Invalid Without Full Consideration Payment : Punjab & Haryana HC

The Punjab & Haryana High Court ruled that a sale deed cannot be registered under Section 77 of the Registration Act if the buyer fails to pay the balance consideration, as execution requires adherence to all contractual terms. This decision reinforces that registration is contingent on substantive performance, not merely formalities like signatures, impacting property transactions and contractual compliance.