Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS
Omkar Soni, S/o. Late Babulal Soni – Appellant
Versus
Punai Bai, W/o. Bhagoli Satnami – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NARENDRA KUMAR VYAS, J.
1. The plaintiff has filed this First appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment and decree dated 16-2-2018 passed by the learned District Judge, Rajnandgaon in Civil Suit No. 75-A/2012 by which the suit filed by the plaintiff has been dismissed.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to hereinafter as per their status shown in the Civil Suit No. 75-A/2012 before the trial Court.
3. Brief Facts reflected from the record are that:
(a) The plaintiff filed suit before the trial Court for specific performance of contract mainly contending that the defendant No.1 Punai Bai who is having land bearing Khasra No. 296 and 365 admeasuring 1.02 acres and 0.78 acres total admeasuring 1.80 acres of land situated in village Khorin Bhata, Rajnandgaon (hereinafter referred to as “suit property”) has executed an agreement on 17-3-2003 for sale of suit property at the rate of Rs. 2,25,000/- per acre which comes to total sale consideration at Rs. 4,05,000/-. The said agreement was executed in presence of two witnesses and defendant No.1 has also received Rs. 2,46,000/- through cheque. It is also the case that
The court upheld the discretion to deny specific performance when serious doubts exist regarding the execution or genuineness of an agreement and recognized the rights of bona fide purchasers.
Expert evidence should not displace substantive evidence in evaluating contractual disputes.
Comparison of signatures by Court is always a hazardous course. Court should not as a matter of course loosely resort to application of Section 73 of Indian Evidence Act.
The requirement to prove the execution of an agreement to sell is essential for specific performance.
Point of Law : Suit for specific performance and permanent injunction – Agreement of Sale - non mentioning of the correct survey number in the agreement of sale cannot be held to be due to inadverten....
The court upheld that corroborated expert evidence can establish the authenticity of a contested agreement, supporting the plaintiff's claim for 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
