Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V. MARNE
Lotus Logistics and Developers Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Evertop Apartments Co-operative Housing Society Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of arbitration and developer's obligations (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondent’s claims and breaches by petitioner (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. arbitration procedures and claims made (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. arguments surrounding specific performance (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. judicial arguments on termination of contract (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. legal precedents on specific performance (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 7. principles of specific performance in contract law (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 8. judicial findings against petitioner’s defenses (Para 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 9. court observations on the situation at hand (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 10. description of deceitful conduct by petitioner (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 11. court’s directives on compliance and performance (Para 32 , 33 , 34) |
| 12. final analysis of the case and rulings (Para 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 13. consequences of not performing contractual obligations (Para 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 14. recognition of claims for damages (Para 41 , 42 , 43) |
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1. By this Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Petitioner has sought invalidation of the Arbitral Award dated 16 August 2024 passed by the learned sole Arbitrator. By t
The court upheld the principle that undertaking given to secure performance of contractual obligations revives a terminated contract, allowing specific performance claims despite prior termination by....
A valid contract for specific performance must have certainty regarding price, parties, property, and terms; lack of clarity renders the agreement void.
Section 34 limits interference with arbitral awards to root perversity; plausible denial of specific performance upheld despite illegal termination, as developer not ready to deliver essential redeve....
Upon valid termination of redevelopment agreement for developer's breaches, no-damages clause bars compensation but society must restore purchase price of utilized FSI/tit-bit land as 'benefit' under....
The execution of a Development Agreement is essential for binding contractual rights, and compliance with timelines specified in earlier agreements is necessary for specific performance claims under ....
In redevelopment disputes under Arbitration Act Section 9, society members' right to safe housing from dilapidated buildings prevails over developer's profit rights where developer caused 13-year del....
Court held that specific performance cannot be enforced due to termination of MOU and lack of owner consent.
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
