Back
PANKAJ MITHAL, S. V. N. BHATTI
Habban Shah – Appellant
Versus
Sheruddin – Respondent
Key Points: - The decree for specific performance is in the nature of a preliminary decree and the court retains control until the sale deed is executed or the decree becomes inexecutable. (!) (!) - Non-deposit of balance sale consideration within the stipulated three months does not automatically extend time or condone delay; the decree may become inexecutable absent extension or extension granted through due process. (!) (!) (!) - Section 28(1) allows either depositing the balance or seeking recession of the contract; the court’s exercise of this power is discretionary and must be equitable to both parties. (!) (!) (!) - It is not mandatory to file a Section 28 application for recession; absence of such application does not automatically revive an inexecutable decree. (!) (!) - A later deposit with court permission does not automatically validate non-compliance or extend time; it does not constitute condonation of delay. (!) (!) - If the decree holder fails to perform within time and does not seek extension, the decree may be treated as rescinded and inexecutable, potentially allowing the other party to resell the property. (!) (!) - The decision emphasizes balancing equities and justice, and that the relief is discretionary rather than mandatory. (!) (!) - The High Court and Executing Court decisions are reviewed to determine whether the decree has become inexecutable due to non-compliance and whether rescission under Section 28 is appropriate. (!) (!) - The appellant’s responsibility to refund earnest money or allow sale of part of the land to satisfy the balance is affirmed where the decree is found inexecutable. (!)
JUDGMENT :
PANKAJ MITHAL, J.
1. Heard Shri Manoj Swarup, learned senior counsel for the defendant-appellant and Shri Divyesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the plaintiff-respondent.
2. Leave granted.
3. A short but an intricate question of law which arises for our consideration in this appeal is: whether the decree of specific performance passed by the court of first instance on 31.10.2012 directing for the execution of sale deed on deposit of the balance sale consideration within three months would be inexecutable for the reason that the balance sale consideration was not deposited within the time stipulated.
4. The suit property is an agricultural land admeasuring 12 kanals and 19 marlas situate in village Shikarpur, Tehsil Tauru, District Mewat in the state of Haryana. The said land belonged to Habban (defendant-appellant). He entered into an agreement to sell the said land to Sheruddin (plaintiff-respondent) for a sale consideration of Rs. 5,00,000/- per acre and received a sum of Rs. 80,000/-in advance. It was agreed that the sale deed shall be executed on or before 15.03.2006 and that balance sale consideration would be payable at the time of execution and registration of sale
(1) Recession of contract – Moving of application under Section 28 of S.R. Act for rescinding contract for non-compliance of condition is not mandatory rather optional and immaterial – Court is not p....
The decree for specific performance remains executable despite delays in deposit of balance sale consideration, provided no rescission is sought by judgment debtors.
Failure to pay the balance sale consideration within the set time does not abandon the contract; the court retains discretion to extend payment timelines under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the discretionary nature of relief of specific performance and the application of Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 in the context of ext....
The executing court has the authority to extend time for deposit of balance consideration in specific performance cases, but such discretion must be exercised judiciously, taking into account the rea....
Point of Law : Provisions of section 28(1) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 in light of the provisions of Order XX Rule, 12A of the CPC, and it was held that the provisions of Order XX, Rule 12A mand....
(1) Rescission of contract – While granting relief of extension, it was open for Court to balance equities by putting decree holder to such terms as may adequately compensate judgment debtor for dela....
A party seeking specific performance must have clean hands; failure to disclose subsequent agreements does not negate execution of prior decrees, provided timelines for compliance are met.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
