Back
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
SABYASACHI BHATTACHARYYA, SUPRATIM BHATTACHARYA
Francom Ventures (OPC) Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Shampa Das – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. questions of fact and law in appeal. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. appellant's readiness and willingness arguments. (Para 5 , 6 , 10 , 18 , 25) |
| 3. allegations regarding tenant eviction and possession. (Para 7 , 9 , 12 , 40 , 54) |
| 4. constitution and requirements of readiness and willingness. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 19 , 30) |
| 5. legal principles governing specific performance. (Para 28 , 33 , 36 , 37 , 42) |
| 6. court’s discretion in granting specific performance. (Para 29 , 31 , 32 , 38) |
| 7. ambiguities in contract terms and their implications. (Para 44 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49) |
| 8. conclusion granting injunction with conditions. (Para 70 , 71 , 72 , 74 , 79) |
Judgment :
Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya, J.
1. The present appeal involves questions of both fact and law and as such is admitted to be heard on the grounds as taken in the memorandum of appeal.
2. The issues involved in the main appeal and the admission stage being identical, we take up the appeal itself for hearing.
3. The appeal arises out of the refusal to grant ad interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff/appellant in a suit for specific performance of a purported agreement comprised in a „term sheet‟ dated April 30, 2025, whereby alle
The court held that continuous readiness and willingness to perform is essential for specific performance, despite the existence of prior conditions like tenant eviction.
Plaintiff's failure to prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform contract negates entitlement to specific performance under Specific Relief Act.
Continuous readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff is a condition precedent for obtaining relief of grant of specific performance, as mandated by Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief A....
Plaintiff must prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform contract for specific performance; mere assertion is insufficient.
Time is of the essence in contracts for immovable property; failure to prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract precludes specific performance.
In a suit for specific performance, the plaintiff must prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract, which was not established in this case.
Readiness and willingness on part of plaintiff is a condition precedent for obtaining relief of specific performance.
Plaintiffs must provide clear evidence of readiness and willingness backed by fund availability to claim specific performance of a contract, as mere statements are insufficient.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of proving readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff as a condition precedent for obtaining relief for grant of spe....
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
