The Curious Case of Chinnakannu v. Chinnathambi (1999) 2 SCC 492

This 1999 judgment has some interesting implications under the Indian Contract Act. A Kerala-based farmer, Chinnathambi, sold a 'ready-to-harvest' coconut tree to a buyer, Chinnakannu, with a 'secret' condition: the tree would become the buyer's only if the yield in a specific year exceeded a certain amount. If not, the tree would revert back to the seller. The buyer took possession but the yield failed to meet the predetermined benchmark. The seller reclaimed the tree, stating it was a condition precedent to the formation of the contract.

What do you community folks think? Is this a classic case of a 'condition precedent' or is it a clever attempt by Chinnathambi to create a loophole? Does the judgment set a wrong precedent? Agree or disagree?