Back
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey, Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru, JJ
Renu Singh (Died And Deleted) Through LRs – Appellant
Versus
Mahjabi Aajra Khanam D/o Late Abdul Haji Khan @ M. A. Khan – Respondent
Judgment :
(Rajani Dubey, J.)
Challenge in this appeal is to the legality and validity of the judgment and decree dated 25.3.2017 passed by VI Additional District Judge, Bilaspur in Civil Suit No.25A/2013 whereby the suit filed by the appellant/plaintiff for specific performance of contract, declaration and permanent injunction has been partly decreed. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to as per their description before the trial court.)
02. Case of the plaintiff, in brief, is that Nazul Sheet No.28, Plot No.71/6, area 436 sqft and adjacent Nazul Sheet No.28, Plot No.113/2, area 1519 sqft, on which a pacca house is constructed (hereinafter referred to as "suit property") is the self-acquired property of father of defendant namely Late M.A. Khan @ Abdul Haji Khan which was given to the defendant by her father through Will dated 5.3.2002 and based on that Will, the defendant got the suit property mutated in her name and acquired the ownership thereof. Since the plaintiff and the defendant were living in the same locality and they were duly acquainted with each other, the defendant being in need of money agreed to sell the suit property for Rs.10.50 lacs to the plaintiff. Thereafter
A plaintiff seeking specific performance must prove both readiness and willingness to perform the contract, failing which the court may order a refund of earnest money instead.
The plaintiff must convincingly demonstrate readiness and willingness to fulfill contractual obligations for specific performance.
In specific performance cases, the plaintiff must prove readiness and willingness, and without necessary permissions, the sale cannot be enforced, leading to recovery of amounts paid due to unjust en....
The court ruled that a written contract prevails over oral agreements, and unjust enrichment principles require the return of amounts paid towards part performance of a contract.
The plaintiff's continuous readiness and willingness to perform the contract, as well as the concept of unjust enrichment, were central legal principles established in the judgment.
The appellate court emphasized that specific performance requires proof of the plaintiff's readiness and willingness to perform the contract, which was not adequately addressed by the trial Court.
The plaintiff must prove readiness and willingness to perform contractual obligations for specific performance; failure to do so results in dismissal of the suit.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the plaintiff's failure to obtain necessary documents and contradictory actions led to the dismissal of the specific performance claim. Additi....
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
