The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of continuous readiness and willingness to perform the contract, as mandated by the Specific Relief Act, in specific performance cases.

S.Ravindra Bhat, J.

1. The parties were heard on the pending applications, I.A. Nos. 11209-10/2003; 4817/2005; 1400/ 2007; 9155/2007; 12186/2009 as well as maintainability of the suit.

2. The suit claims specific performance of an agreement allegedly entered into by the plaintiff (hereafter called “Home Developers”) with the first defendant (hereafter called “Ms. Bhanu Sangwan”) on 24.08.2001. The subject matter of the agreement was the sale of the constructed first floor of property, built on C-545, Defence Colony, New Delhi, a 325 sq. yards plot (hereafter “suit property”). The suit alleges that the total consideration agreed upon was Rs. One crore out of which a sum of Rs.5 lakhs was paid on the date of the agreement; of the balance of Rs.95 lakhs, Rs.76 lakhs was agreed to be paid by the plaintiff within 15 days of signing of the agreement and at the time of taking clear, vacant and lawful possession of the terrace of the suit property; the remaining Rs.19 lakhs was to be paid at the time of completion of construction. The plaintiffs contend that Ms. Bhanu Sangwan assured them that the property was freehold and that the terrace was free from all encumbrances. It is alleged that she, however, avoided handing-over of peaceful possession within the time or any time thereafter and around the end of August 2001, the said Ms. Bhanu Sangwan expressed her difficulty stating that she required some time to shift from the premises, as her former husband, Brigadier A.S. Sangwan was in occupation of the ground-floor portion of the property.

3. It is alleged that the third defendant was acting as the Attorney for Ms. Bhanu Sangwan and used to frequently negotiate with the plaintiff; sometime in October 2001, the said Ms. Bhanu Sangwan shifted into the ground floor premises of the suit property. The plaintiff mentions about an agreement entered into with Ms. Bhanu Sangwan, dated 11.11.2001, whereby the first floor property consisting of 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, kitchen and front terrace were let-out for Rs.11,000/-per month for 11 months to it, and its (Home Developer’s) project manager, Shri Jitender Gupta occupied the said premises. It is contended that Ms. Bhanu Sangwan commenced renovation of the ground-floor of the suit property. It is further alleged that the plaintiff’s said Project Manager, Mr. Jitender Gupta was, mala fide, asked to vacate the premises by Ms. Bhanu Sangwan in February, 2002.

4. The plaintiff mentions that Ms. Bhanu Sangwan, disregarding the previous agreement to sell dated 24.08.2001, entered into sale agreement with one M/s. Raison Engineers & Builders Pvt. Ltd. and executed Sale Deeds on 19.07.2002 in respect of terrace rights and the ground-floor of the property, for a total consideration of Rs.44,55,000/-to the second defendant. The sale deeds were registered. It is urged that the plaintiff, on becoming aware of the transaction contacted Ms. Bhanu Sangwan, who showed ignorance of this sale, and alleged that fraud had been played upon her by the purchasers. The plaintiff mentions that Ms. Bhanu Sangwan filed Suit. No. 1267/2002, against the purchasers, (including the third defendant), claiming cancellation of the sale deeds. It is urged that since the sale deeds were entered into between Ms. Bhanu Sangwan and the second defendant during pendency of a suit filed by Mr. Jitender Gupta, the plaintiff’s Manager, being CS (OS) 344/2002, the same were illegal.

5. The plaintiff urges that it has always been ready and willing to perform its part of the contract and continues to be so and that since the owner, Ms. Bhanu Sangwan has refused to execute the sale deed and on the contrary, created third-party rights, it is entitled to the reliefs of specific performance and a decree for permanent injunction. The plaintiff had filed an application under Order 2 Rule 2, seeking leave to file a separate suit, if necessary, on a later date. The said application was not pressed all this while, though at an earlier stage