Periavenkan Udaya Tevar vs Subramanian Chetti on 13 October, 1896
7. In the present case the plaintiff must show a breach of con-tract by the defendant. The fact that he himself paid the debts, in itself, in our opinion, gives him no cause of action. If he paid them before the expiry of a reasonable time after the agreement, the defence would have been open to the defendant that he had not had reasonable time to fulfil his contract, and that he had consequently not broken his contract. If the plain-tiff waited till the expiry of a reasonable time the defendant's breach of contract would give him a cause of action, whether he himself paid the debts or not. See Dorasinga Tevar v. Arunachalam Chetti (1899) I.L.R. 23 M. 441. The question as to what is a reasonable time is a question of fact-Contract Act, Section 40.