judgement
Subject : - Contract Law
Description :
In this case, the plaintiffs entered into a sale agreement with the defendants to purchase a property. The plaintiffs paid a substantial amount as advance, but the defendants later refused to execute the sale deed. The plaintiffs filed a suit seeking specific performance of the agreement, as well as an alternate relief of return of the advance payment.
The plaintiffs argued that they had paid a total of ₹16 lakh as advance and were ready and willing to perform their part of the agreement. They claimed that the defendants were trying to sell the property to a third party at a higher price, despite the existing agreement with the plaintiffs.
The defendants, on the other hand, denied receiving the full advance payment and claimed that the plaintiffs had failed to pay the balance sale consideration within the stipulated time, thereby breaching the agreement. They also argued that the suit was barred by limitation and under Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The court found that the plaintiffs had only proved the payment of ₹15 lakh as advance and not the additional ₹1 lakh they had claimed. The court also held that the time was essence of the contract and the plaintiffs had failed to prove their readiness and willingness to perform their part of the agreement within the stipulated time.
However, the court recognized that the plaintiffs were entitled to the alternate relief of refund of the advance payment of ₹15 lakh, along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of the suit until the date of the decree, and post-decree interest at the rate of 6% per annum until the date of realization.
The court partially allowed the appeal, confirming the trial court's decision to deny the relief of specific performance, but setting aside the trial court's decision on the alternate relief. The court directed the defendants to pay the plaintiffs the refund of ₹15 lakh, along with the specified interest amounts.
#SpecificPerformance #ContractLaw #RealEstate
Supreme Court Rules Criminal Courts Must Not Act As Recovery Agents For Disputed Dues
27 Jul 2026
Rajya Sabha Bill Seeks To Criminalize Vande Mataram Disruption Under The National Honour Act
27 Jul 2026
Will Competitive Exams Deplete Delhi District Courts of Judges During Crucial Trial Proceedings This Year?
27 Jul 2026
Bombay High Court Adjourns Defamation Case Involving Union Minister Nitin Gadkari And Online Media Platforms
28 Jul 2026
Rajasthan High Court Directs State to Form Separate Wings for Crime Investigation and Security
28 Jul 2026
Gujarat High Court Upholds Constitutionality Of CGST Section 16 2 c Denying Unpaid Input Tax
28 Jul 2026
Punjab and Haryana High Court Issues New Guidelines For Legal Aid Defense Counsel System
28 Jul 2026
Government Introduces Public Examinations Amendment Bill 2026 In Lok Sabha To Curb Exam Paper Leaks
28 Jul 2026
Should Delhi High Court Increase Pecuniary Jurisdiction of District Courts to ₹10 Crore Threshold?
28 Jul 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.