Back
A. A. NAKKIRAN
P. K. Rajendiran – Appellant
Versus
P. A. Vinayagam – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: This Appeal Suit has been filed, under Order 41 Rule 1 read with Section 96 of CPC, against the Judgement and decree, dated 18.04.2016, made in OS.No.121 of 2011, by the Additional District Judge, Thiruvallur.)
1. This Appeal Suit has been filed, against the judgement and decree, dated 18.04.2016, made in OS.No.121 of 2011, by the Additional District Judge, Thiruvallur.
2. The suit was filed for specific performance of the sale agreement, dated 19.11.2010, failing which, for a direction for execution of the sale deed through the Court and for permanent injunction and for costs.
3. The case of the Plaintiff, as set out, in the plaint is that the Defendant is the owner of the suit property. One Nithianandam, who was working in the Plaintiff Company, had introduced the Defendant. The Defendant had entered into a sale agreement, dated 19.11.2009, with the Plaintiff, to sell the schedule property for a sale consideration of Rs.19,05,000/- and the Defendant had received an advance amount of Rs.19,00.000/- and it was agreed that at any time, on payment of the balance sale consideration, the sale should be completed. The Defendant had requested one week time to vacate the sui
The failure to verify the title and other documents before entering into a sale agreement, and the non-registration of the agreement as required by law, can lead to the dismissal of a suit for specif....
The court ruled that a plaintiff must prove readiness and willingness to perform a contract for specific performance, and the burden lies on the defendant to prove coercion or lack of proper agreemen....
The court emphasized the importance of proving the genuineness of a sale agreement and the readiness and willingness of the plaintiff in a specific performance case.
The burden of proving the execution of a document rests on the party asserting its existence. In this case, the plaintiff failed to discharge this burden, and the Court found the plaintiff's case to ....
The plaintiff's failure to prove willingness to perform the contract led to the grant of the alternate relief of refund of the advance money.
In a suit for specific performance where no time is fixed, the limitation period begins upon notice of refusal. An unregistered sale agreement is admissible under Section 49 of the Registration Act, ....
When a defendant alleges coercion regarding the execution of a document, the burden is on them to lead evidence. A failure to enter the witness box to cross-examination results in an adverse presumpt....
The court affirmed that specific performance is a discretionary remedy, requiring the plaintiff to prove the validity of the contract and readiness to perform.
For a plaintiff to succeed in a suit for specific performance, they must prove the existence of a valid sale agreement and demonstrate continuous readiness and willingness to perform their contractua....
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
