The Supreme Court of Pakistan has ruled that specific performance—being an equitable relief—can only be granted to a party that continuously demonstrates readiness, willingness, and financial capacity to fulfill contractual obligations. The court held that a buyer who fails to pay the remaining sale consideration within the agreed timeframe cannot seek enforcement of the agreement.
A two-member bench comprising Justice Shakeel Ahmad and Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb issued a detailed judgment while disposing of civil appeals arising from a Lahore High Court decision in a property dispute involving a five-kanal and four-marla plot in Sialkot.
According to the case record, the buyer, Amjad Javed, had entered into an agreement on March 11, 2014, paying Rs. 800,000 as earnest money, while the remaining Rs. 6.48 million was to be paid by July 27, 2014.
The court observed that the agreement clearly stated that failure to pay within the stipulated period would result in forfeiture of the earnest money, making time an essential condition of the contract.
When the buyer later filed a suit seeking specific performance, he failed to deposit the remaining amount despite being granted two opportunities by the trial court and repeatedly requested extensions. As a result, the trial court dismissed the case.
The Supreme Court noted that a genuinely willing purchaser would have complied with court directions and deposited the outstanding amount without delay. It emphasized that mere claims of readiness in legal pleadings are insufficient unless supported by actual financial capability and conduct.
The judgment further highlighted that in modern real estate markets, where property values fluctuate rapidly, courts cannot strictly rely on the traditional view that time is not essential in property transactions.
The court also observed that a buyer cannot indefinitely bind a seller to a contract while failing to fulfill his own obligations. It added that depositing the payment years later does not validate non-compliance with contractual deadlines or court timelines.
Concluding that the buyer’s conduct reflected a lack of diligence, readiness, and willingness required for equitable relief, the Supreme Court upheld the Lahore High Court’s decision and dismissed the appeal.
