NCLAT: Can’t Dismiss Restoration App. if Filed in 30 Days from Date of Dismissal of Original App.  ||  Delhi HC: Communication between Parties through Whatsapp Constitute Valid Agreement  ||  Delhi HC Seeks Response from Govt. Over Penalties on Petrol Pumps Supplying Fuel to Old Vehicles  ||  Centre Notifies "Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Rules, 2025"  ||  Del. HC: Can’t Reject TM Owner’s Claim Merely because Defendant Could have Sought Removal of Mark  ||  Bombay HC: Cannot Treat Sole Director of OPC, Parallelly with Separate Legal Entity  ||  Delhi HC: Can Apply 'Family of Marks' Concept to Injunct Specific Marks  ||  HP HC: Can’t Set Aside Ex-Parte Decree for Mere Irregularity  ||  Cal. HC: Order by HC Bench Not Conferred With Determination by Roster is Void  ||  Calcutta HC: Purchase Order Including Arbitration Agreement to Prevail Over Tax Invoice Lacking it    

SC: Merely Having Explicit Clause Not Sufficient to Make Time Essence of The Contract - (15 Nov 2021)

CONTRACT

Supreme Court has observed that merely having an explicit clause may not be sufficient to make time the essence of the contract. The contractual clauses having extension procedure and imposition of liquidated damages, are good indicators that time was not the essence of the contract. The Court added whether time is of the essence in a contract, has to be culled out from the reading of the entire contract as well as the surrounding circumstances.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   TIME ESSENCE OF CONTRACT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved