Back
RAJENDRA M. SAREEN
Kaushik Laxmansinh Rathod – Appellant
Versus
Rajendrasinh Daulatsinh Chauhan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Present Second Appeal has been preferred by the appellant – original defendant against the concurrent findings of the learned Courts below arising out of the suit for specific performance of contract, declaration, possession and perpetual injunction of the premises.
2. The factual matrix of the dispute between the parties are as under:
2.1 That the respondent filed the suit for specific performance of contract, declaration, possession and perpetual injunction of the suit premises, wherein the shop no.2-A and 2-B situated at first floor of Bombay Shopping Center Premises Cooperative Housing Society Ltd., Race Course, Vadodara.
2.2 The appellant – defendant no.1, who is a Doctor- Radiologist by profession and has his x-ray unit at the said Bombay Shopping Center, approached the respondent – plaintiff and offered to sale the suit premises for sum of Rs.3,00,000/-. After negotiation, an agreement to sale was executed on 19th October, 2006 at Baroda between appellant - defendant no.1 and the respondent – plaintiff. The said agreement to sale duly reduced in writing and is registered with the office of the Sub-Registrar, Vadodara on 19th October, 2006 vide registration Entr
The judgment emphasizes the importance of proving readiness and willingness to perform a contract for specific performance, as well as the limited scope of interference in concurrent findings of fact....
(1) Agreement to sell – Suit seeking relief of Specific Performance – Readiness and willingness of the plaintiff must be assessed in light of overall conduct of parties and attending circumstances of....
The importance of presenting timely and substantiated evidence to support claims, and the consequences of negligence and lack of diligence in pursuing legal remedies.
The court established that in a suit for specific performance, the plaintiff's readiness and willingness to perform the contract must be assessed in light of the entire context, including possession ....
Second Appeal is competent only if it involves, at the stage of admission, substantial question of law.
Under section 100 CPC, after the 1976 amendment, it is essential for the High Court to formulate a substantial question of law and it is not permissible to reverse the judgment of the first appellate....
Sale agreement valid with consideration via admission; readiness/willingness shown by possession, payment, deposit despite attachment.
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
