B SYAMSUNDER
Nabeen Kumar Sahu – Appellant
Versus
Baratam Bangaramma – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
B Syamsunder, J.
As parties to both appeals, and their respective contentions are similar, both appeals are disposed of by way of Common Judgment.
AS No.413 of 2001:
2. AS No.413 of 2001 is filed by the appellants/plaintiffs against the Judgment and Decree passed in OS No.89 of 1994 on the file of Additional Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Srikakulam dated 20.10.2000. The said suit was originally filed by the appellants/plaintiffs against the respondents for specific performance of contract of sale under oral agreement of sale, dated 01.06.1994 in between the appellants and respondent Nos.1 to 4 in respect of plaint schedule site, which is described as under:
Vacant site situated in the southern row of Mandala Street, Near Surya Mahal Theatre, in Srikakulam town, within the limits of Srikakulam Sub-Registration in Srikakulam Mandal in Srikakulam District, measuring East to West 37 feet (11.28 metres) and North to South 80 feet (24.54 metres) i.e., 7 ½ cents covered by Town Survey Number 47 whose market value is Rs.4.12,500-00 at the rate of Rs.55,000-00 ps per cent having the following boundaries:
|
| |
Brij Mohan and others vs. Sugra Begum and others (1990) 4 SCC 147
An oral agreement for the sale of immovable property requires proof of consideration and a concluded contract to be enforceable under the Indian Contract Act.
Point of law: specific performance of oral Agreement of sale – Not proved - In a case of specific performance of contract, a greater degree of certainty is required and it demands a clear, definite a....
(1) Agreement to sell – Specific performance will not be ordered if contract itself suffers from some defect which makes contract invalid or unenforceable – Discretion of court will not be there even....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's affirmation of the specific performance of the agreement of sale dated 05-8-1995, and the rejection of the 4th defendant's claim as a b....
A plaintiff seeking specific performance must demonstrate continuous readiness and willingness to complete contract obligations, failing which relief may be denied.
The Court may consider the hardship on the parties in deciding whether to grant specific performance.
Specific performance of an oral agreement requires clear evidence of readiness and willingness, and costs should not be awarded to parties lacking absolute ownership.
The court clarified that costs should deter frivolous claims and ensure compliance with legal standards, but in this case, neither party was entitled to costs due to their conduct.
Unregistered oral agreements for sale of property are unenforceable and cannot be claimed for specific performance.
The court affirmed that specific performance is a discretionary remedy, requiring the plaintiff to prove the validity of the contract and readiness to perform.
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.