K.RAMASWAMY, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH
Jugraj Singh – Appellant
Versus
Labh Singh – Respondent
ORDER
The petitioners are defendants 2 and 3. The first defendant Jasbir Singh had executed an agreement of sale dt.30-8-1984 in favour of the plaintiffs Labh Singh and his brother Surinder Singh. The petitioners had an agreement of sale on 4-1-1985. The plaintiffs filed the suit against Jasbir Singh, the first defendant. All the Courts have concurrently found that the petitioners/defendants 2 and 3 are not bona fide purchasers for value without notice of the prior agreement dt. 30-8-84 and accordingly, decreed the suit. Thus, this S.L.P.
2. It is contended for the petitioners that the trial Court having found the petitioners to be necessary parties was not right in negativing the plea of the petitioners that Labha Singh plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform his part of the contract and that the High Court equally committed an error of law in rejecting that plea. We find no force in the contention.
3. Secion 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that the plaintiff must plead and prove that he has always been ready and willing to perform his part of the essential terms of the contract. The continuous readiness and willingness at all stages from the date of the agree
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.