Suit for Specific Performance

Decided : 7th January, 2018

Reported: 7th January, 2018


Specific performance - Relief of - Grant of relief of specific performance is a discretionary and equitable relief-  Material questions, which are required to be gone into for grant of the relief of specific performance, enunciated -  The said questions are part of the statutory requirements (See Sections 16 (c), 20, 21, 22, 23 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 and the forms 47/48 of Appendix A to C of the Code of Civil Procedure) -  These requirements have to be properly pleaded by the parties in their respective pleadings and proved with the aid of evidence in accordance with law -  It is only then the Court is entitled to exercise its discretion and accordingly grant or refuse the relief of specific performance depending upon the case made out by the parties on facts - Specific Relief Act, 1963 Sections 16 (c), 20, 21, 22, 23  - CPC, 1908 (V of 1908) - Forms 47/48 of Appendix A to C.


First, whether there exists a valid and concluded contract between the parties for sale/purchase of the suit property; Second, whether the plaintiff has been ready and willing to perform his part of contract and whether he is still ready and willing to perform his part as mentioned in the contract; Third, whether the plaintiff has, in fact, performed his part of the contract and, if so, how and to what extent and in what manner he has performed and whether such performance was in conformity with the terms of the contract; Fourth, whether it will be equitable to grant the relief of specific performance to the plaintiff against the defendant in relation to suit property or it will cause any kind of hardship to the defendant and, if so, how and in what manner and the extent if such relief is eventually granted to the plaintiff; Fifth, whether the plaintiff is entitled for grant of any other alternative relief, namely, refund of earnest money etc. and, if so, on what grounds.2019 SCeJ 60


Suit for Specific Performance – Preliminary Issues – Issues have already been framed and the question of readiness and willingness cannot be determined without referring to any evidence on record, therefore, framing of preliminary issue on the aforesaid premise is wholly unjustified - The conduct of the parties would be gone into by the trial Court at the relevant stage with reference to the evidence on record – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908) Order 14 Rule 2. (2018-1) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER

Suit for Specific Performance of Agreement to Sell – The time frame for deposit of the balance sale consideration was implicit when the trial Court ordered that the sale deed is to be executed within two months from the date of judgment, upon deposit of the balance sale consideration – What would be the effect of pendency of appeal against the decree sought to be executed – As the operation of the decree had never been stayed – Merely filing of an appeal against the decree in question would not have the effect of stay of the impugned decree – Unless and until the decree in question is specifically stayed, the mere factum of filing of appeal would not have an effect of stay of execution proceedings – No such application for ejectment of time was filed – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (V of 1908) Order 41.   (2018-3) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER

Suit  for Specific Performance – Decree – No time/direction was granted to deposit the balance amount - If due to one or the other reason, petitioner could not deposit the balance sale consideration, the Court is always competent to extend the time - The balance sale consideration has already been deposited in terms of the interim order passed by this Court - Respondents will always be at liberty to raise appropriate objection(s) before the Appellate Court or Executing Court.. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER 

Specific Performance of the Agreement to Sell – For transferring 1/3rd share in the bus alongwith permit, in the alternative recovery of the amount – Part of the amount not paid – Suit dismissed – Would not entail cancellation of the agreement and deprive the respondent plaintiff for return of the amount paid – Ordering refund is just and fair as over a period of time, the value of the vehicle had deprecated. (2018-2) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER

Specific Performance of the Agreement to Sell – The best possible evidence i.e. stamp vendor from whom the actual stamps for execution of the agreement to sell had been purchased, has been withheld - He could have adduced evidence to prove that actually the stamp papers were purchased by the seller for entering into the agreement - Even onus as per Section 101 of the Indian Evidence Act has not been discharged – Suit dismissed – Order upheld - Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872).    (2018-3) PUNJAB LAW REPORTER



Register SCeJ  Free Updates*

Supreme Court e@journal

Subscribe or take a 4 week FREE trial 

Note: Please fill out the fields marked with an asterisk.