Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M.G.S.KAMAL
Drakshayini, W/o. Suresh – Appellant
Versus
Doddegowda, S/o. Late Huchegowda – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.G.S. KAMAL, J.
This appeal is by the unsuccessful plaintiff, who is before this Court being aggrieved by the judgment and decree dated 18.08.2017, passed in O.S.No.419/2009, on the file of Principal Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Channarayapatna, ('trial Court' for short), which is confirmed by judgment and decree dated 27.11.2018, passed in R.A.No.35/2017, on the file of Senior Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Channarayapatna.
2. The above suit in O.S.No.35/2017 is filed by the plaintiff seeking the relief of specific performance of contract of sale of the suit schedule property.
3. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant No.1 is the owner of the suit schedule property, who is well acquainted with the plaintiff. That the plaintiff has been residing in a house existing on the suit schedule property along with her family for more than fifteen years as a tenant under the defendant No.1. That in the month of November 2003, the defendant No.1 expressed his desire to sell the suit property including the house situated therein for his legal necessities. After negotiations, the price was fixed at Rs.80,000/- and on 20.11.2003, an Agreement of Sale was executed by defendant No.1 in
To establish a claim for specific performance, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving the authenticity of the contract, which was found lacking in this case.
The court affirmed that specific performance is a discretionary remedy, requiring the plaintiff to prove the validity of the contract and readiness to perform.
An agreement of sale signed by vendor alone and delivered to purchaser, and accepted by the purchaser, has always been considered to be a valid contract. In the event of breach by the vendor, it can ....
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....
The plaintiffs failed to prove the validity of the sale agreement and the payment of consideration, leading to the dismissal of their appeal for specific performance.
The requirement of consensus ad idem and the equitable discretion to grant specific performance.
In a suit for specific performance, the Plaintiff must prove the genuineness of the agreement and his readiness to perform, failing which the suit must be dismissed.
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
