Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
Venuthurumalli Gopala Krishna Rao
K. Sirajuddin Khan Khatak – Appellant
Versus
P Liakath Ali Khan, Rep. by his GPA Holder – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Venuthurumalli Gopala Krishna Rao, J.
The appeal is filed against the judgment and decree dated 03-3-2005 in O.S.No.131 of 1997 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kadapa, Kadapa District. The suit is filed by the General Power of Attorney Holder of the plaintiff against the defendants 1 to 5 for specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 30-5-1994 in respect of the plaint schedule property and to direct the defendants 1 and 5 to receive the balance sale consideration and execute a sale deed in favour of the plaintiff.
2. The case of the plaintiff as narrated in the plaint, in brief, is as follows:
(a) It is pleaded that the 1st defendant is the owner of the schedule property house bearing No.19/22 in Kadapa town and he offered it for sale to the plaintiff and the bargain was settled at Rs.7,00,000/- as sale consideration and an agreement dated 30-5-1994 was executed by the 1st defendant in favour of the plaintiff after receipt of advance of Rs.1,50,000/-. The plaintiff intended to go to Kuwait and therefore, he authorized one Sardar Khan to act as his agent and told the defendants 1 and 2 that his agent would pay the balance sale consideration of Rs.5,50,000/-
Time is of the essence in contracts for sale of immovable property; failure to act within stipulated time undermines claims for specific performance.
![Dudala Sarojinamma [died] VS Dudala Rama Prasad](https://cdn.supremetoday.ai/static/img/news-place-holder.png)
(1) Specific performance of agreement of sale –Alternative plea of refund of earnest amount and damage could not be bar to claiming decree for specific Performance of contract.(2) Specific performanc....
Specific performance of a contract is a discretionary remedy that requires the plaintiff to prove readiness and willingness to perform their obligations within the stipulated time.
Time is an essence of the contract in specific performance cases, and plaintiffs must prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform their obligations.
The court emphasized that specific performance is discretionary and requires the plaintiff to prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform the contract, which was not established in this cas....
The plaintiff's failure to file the suit within the limitation period and to prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract resulted in dismissal of the specific performance claim.
Time is of the essence of the contract and the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform its part of the contract in terms of the agreement.
Proof of continuous readiness and willingness is essential for specific performance; failure to demonstrate such readiness undermines entitlement to equitable relief.
The readiness and willingness of the parties to perform their part of the contract, as per the agreement of sale, is crucial in determining the entitlement to the discretionary relief of specific per....
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
