Plaintiffs must provide clear evidence of readiness and willingness backed by fund availability to claim specific performance of a contract, as mere statements are insufficient.

JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal arises out of a suit for specific performance of contract of sale of immoveable property.

2. This appeal has been filed challenging judgment dated 05.04.2022 (decree signed on 16.04.2022) passed by the learned District Judge-I, Dhanbad in Civil Appeal No. 24 of 2020. The appeal preferred by the plaintiffs has been allowed and the judgment dated 23.02.2019 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)-I, Dhanbad in Title Suit No. 73 of 2010 has been set aside. The defendant is the appellant.

3. Inspite of service of notice, nobody has entered appearance on behalf of the respondents.

4. This appeal was admitted for final hearing vide order dated 27.01.2025 on the following substantial question of law: -

“Whether the learned first appellate court has committed a substantial error of law while reversing the decree of the learned trial court and failed to consider that readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiffs was not proved as the plaintiffs failed in disclosing the source through which they would pay the balance consideration amount of Rs. 1,80,000/-?”

Arguments of the appellant/defendant.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant while referring to the plaint has submitted that the averments regarding readiness and willingness has been made in paragraph 9 of the plaint and has submitted that there is just a mere statement and no further details regarding the source of fund to pay the balance consideration amount has been disclosed in the plaint. Paragraph 9 of the plaint is quoted as under: -

“9. That the plaintiffs are still ready and willing to purchase the said property morefully described in the schedule of the plaint by paying the balance consideration amount of Rs.1,80,000/- to the defendant besides incurring expenses for completion of the deed and the defendant is legally bound to execute registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs in terms of agreement dated19.03.2008.”

6. The learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the learned trial court had scrutinized the materials on record and framed the issue regarding readiness and willingness as issue No. VII and decided issue No. V, VI and VII together. However, the appeal has been admitted only on the point of readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiffs.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant has referred to the trial court’s judgment and has submitted that the evidence of PW-1(plaintiff) has been considered in details and in paragraph 26 of the cross examination PW-1 admitted that he had performed the marriage of his daughter in the year 2008 and paragraph 29 of his cross examination he deposed that ^cdk;k jde dk tqxkM vius yksxks ls tqxkM fd;k Fkk bldk dksbZ dkxtkr ugha cuk FkkA^^meaning thereby that in order to pay the balance amount he had made arrangements from his own people but did not prepare any document to this effect.

8. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the evidence of PW-1 goes to show that he had claimed to have made arrangement for payment of balance considerations from other persons and no details has been given in the plaint nor any further details has been given in the evidence and the plaintiff also admitted that no document for that purpose was prepared.

9. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned trial court after scrutinizing the materials came to s