Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SATHISH NINAN, P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JJ
Mariyamma C.J, W/o.A.S.Mathew – Appellant
Versus
Rajappan, S/o.Ramakrishnan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. suit for specific performance dismissed due to inconsistent claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. defendant's financial dealings and claims examined. (Para 6 , 7) |
JUDGMENT :
Sathish Ninan, J.
The suit for specific performance of an oral agreement to reconvey a property, with alternate reliefs to cancel Ext.A1 Sale Deed or to declare it as null and void or as sham, and other reliefs, was dismissed by the trial court.
The additional plaintiffs 3 to 5 are in appeal.
2. According to the original plaintiff, the defendant is a businessman doing business abroad in UAE. The original plaintiff's daughter-Preethy, and the defendant, had business dealings. In connection with such business, to enable the defendant to avail a loan, the original plaintiff executed Ext.A1 Sale Deed(Ext.B1 is the original) in favour of the defendant on 11.03.2014. It was agreed that the property will be reconveyed within a period of one year. No sale consideration passed under Ext.A1. The defendant failed to reconvey the property. Accordingly the suit is filed claiming the following reliefs:-
(i) Specific performance of the oral agreement dated 11.03.2014 to reconvey the property, or
(ii) Cancel Ext.A1=B1 Sal
The court affirmed that a Sale Deed executed with consideration is valid, and contradictory claims regarding its nature cannot coexist in a suit for specific performance.
Registered sale deeds presume valid transfer; plaintiff failed to prove oral re-conveyance agreements by cogent evidence.
The plaintiff failed to prove execution of the agreement and her readiness to perform, justifying the trial court's dismissal of the specific performance suit.
In suits for specific performance, plaintiffs must establish readiness, willingness, and privity of contract; lack of credible evidence leads to dismissal of claims for equitable relief.
A plaintiff seeking specific performance must demonstrate readiness and willingness to perform the agreement, with evidence of privity and capability to fulfill obligations throughout the proceedings....
A valid agreement for specific performance requires clear intent and consistent evidence of readiness and willingness from the plaintiff to execute the contract, which was not established in this cas....
In a suit for specific performance, the plaintiff must prove the execution of the agreement and readiness to perform the contract, including financial capability.
The plaintiff failed to prove the execution of the sale agreement, and the amendment to include a claim for the return of the advance amount was not permissible as it would change the nature of the s....
It is settled law that if a person executes an agreement to sell property, vendor is not entitled to put forward, in a suit for specific performance by purchaser defence that vendor had no title.
The court reaffirmed that in specific performance cases, the burden of proof lies on the defendant to substantiate claims regarding the advance amount and contract genuineness, ultimately determining....
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
