What are the consequences of a court ruling in favour of a plaintiff's right to exercise an exercise option on a lease?

Parenthetically, it is noted that the spectre raised by the defendants of horrendous illogical consequences of this ruling are exaggerated and unreal. There is little or no possibility of plaintiff beneficially exercising this option at a time when no lease exists due to his non compliance, or of a forced stock sale at a time of accumulated rent default. By its explicit terms this option agreement is exercisable only during the life of the lease hold. In light of the total relationship of the parties, this court would most likely so construe the instruments even if the language did not so require (see Thompson v. Coe, 96 Conn. 644, 115 A. 219, 17 A.L.R. 1233 (1921)).