Where the purchaser refuses or neglects to complete his purchase, and is supposed to be a responsible person, the solicitor of the party conducting the sale should procure the Master's report, and the orders confirming it nisi and absolutely (w); notice of motion for the order absolute must be served on the purchaser (x): if, however, the purchaser has obtained the order nisi, and neglects to obtain the second order, the same may be obtained by the vendors on motion (y), which is of course, and if made specially will be refused with costs (z); but can be made only on a seal day (a). If the purchaser be supposed to be incompetent in point of means, the vendors may move, on notice, that he be discharged, and that the estate be resold (b); or, as is now the more usual and more eligible course, to obtain an order, not that the purchaser be discharged, but that the estate be resold, and that he may pay the expenses arising from his non-completion of the purchase, the expenses of the application to the Court, and of the resale, and any deficiency in price on the resale (c).

Allowed compensation for misdescription of estate.

Course to be adopted if purchaser refuse to complete.

(o) Calvert v. Godfrey, 6 Beav. 97; see Peto v. Gardner, 2 Y. & C. C. C. 312. See, as to special circumstances warranting a sale, Garmstone v. Gaunt, 1 Coll. 577; and see, as to the sale by the Court of charity lands, Att.-Gen. v. Corporation of Newark, 1 Ha. 395; Att.-Gen. v. South Sea Company, 4 Beav. 453, and cases cited: it seems doubtful whether the Court can direct a sale upon petition under Sir S. Romilly's Act (52 Geo. III. c. 101); see In re Parke's Charity, 12 Sim. 329; In re Newton's Charity, 12 Jur. 1011; In re Suir

Island Charity, 3 J. & Lat. 171.

(p) Blacklow v. Laws, 2 Ha. 40; Johnstone v. Baber, 8 Beav. 233.

(q) Colclough v. Sterum, 3 Bli. 181, 186, 188; Lutwych v. Winford 2 Bro. C. C. 248, 251.

(r) S. C.

(s) See Sug. 67; Bowen v. Evans, 1 J. & L. 178; 2 H. L. C. 257; see also, on the general subject, Thorn-hill v. Glover, 3 Dru. & W. 195.

(t) Colclough v. Sterum, 3 Bli. 181 - 186.

(u) Cann v. Cann, 3 Sim. 447.

If the purchaser is responsible, the vendors may move that within a given time he pay his money into Court; if he appear on the motion he is prima facie entitled to have the title referred to the Master; and, if he do not appear, it seems to be requisite that the vendors shall have delivered the abstract, and procured the Master's report in favour of the title (d); or that the purchaser shall have accepted the title (e): where defendants to the suit who were entitled with the plaintiff to shares in the estate, purchased a part of it of which they were in pos-session, and the conditions precluded any objection to the title, they were ordered to pay in the entire purchase-money, although they claimed allowances for improvements and the estate was incumbered (f).

If supposed to be irresponsible.

If supposed to be responsible.

(w) See Dan. Ch. P. by H. 1205; Sug. 71.

(x) Ibid.

(y) Chillingworth v. Chillingworth, 1 Sim. 291; Lidbetter v. Smith, 5 Beav. 377; Roberts v. Williams, 2 Ha. 151.

(z) Robertson v. Skelton, 10 Beav. 197.

(a) Ibid. 199.

(b) Hodder v. Ruffin, 1 V. & B. 544; Cunningham v. Williams, 2

Anst. 344; Dan. Ch. P. by H. 1206; Sug. 71.

(c) Harding v. Harding, 4 Myl. & Cr. 514; Saunders v. Gray, ibid. 515; Gray v. Gray, 1 Beav. 199.

(d) Dan. Ch. P. by H. 1207, and cases cited; and see Buhner v. Alison, 8 Jur. 440, V. C. W.; 15 L. J., N. S., 11 Ch.

(e) Rutter v. Marriott, 10 Beav. 33.

On the other hand, where the contract is inequitable (g), or where to enforce it would be attended with great hardship, as in the case of a sudden and violent change in the money market (h), or where the purchaser has by mistake given an unreasonable price for the estate (i) and is expeditious in applying to the Court (k), he will, according to some authorities, be allowed to forfeit his deposit (if any), and abandon the contract: but this will not be conceded on the mere ground of the price being excessive (l), nor in the case of a person without authority buying the estate to prevent a sale at an undervalue (m); nor, it is conceived, under any ordinary state of circumstances.

Purchaser, whether allowed to forfeit deposit and abandon contract.

(f) Bulmer v. Allison, 15 L. J., N. S., Ch. 11., L. C.

(g) Sug. 89.

(h) Savile v. Savile, 1 P. Wms. 745; sed quaere.

(i) Morshead v. Frederick, cited, but with disapprobation, Sug. 90.

(k) See Price v. North, 2 Y. & C. 620, 626.

(l) In re Birch, cited Sug. 89.

(m) Nelthorpe v. Pennyman, 14 Ves. 517.