R. SUBRAMANIAN, R. SAKTHIVEL
A. L. Deivanathan – Appellant
Versus
R. Rajavarman (Died) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
R. SAKTHIVEL, J.
[PRAYER: First Appeal filed under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, praying to set aside the judgment and decree dated 18.01.2017 passed in O.S.No.191 of 2011 by the learned III Additional District Judge, Salem.]
The appellants herein are the plaintiffs in O.S.No.191 of 2011 on the file of 'III Additional District Judge, Salem' (henceforth 'Trial Court').
2. For the sake of convenience, henceforth, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the suit i.e., the appellants herein and the respondents herein will be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants respectively.
3. Feeling aggrieved with the judgment and decree dated January 18, 2017, passed by the Trial Court in O.S.No.191 of 2011, the plaintiffs have preferred this Appeal under Section 96 read with Order XLI Rule 1 of the ‘Code of Civil Procedure, 1908’ (henceforth ‘CPC’), praying to set aside the aforementioned judgment and decree. It is brought to our notice that the 1st respondent in this appeal died pending appeal. The other 3 respondents are his children they are recorded as his legal representatives.
Plaintiffs’ case
4. The case of the plaintiffs is th
Saradamani Kandappan Vs. S.Rajalakshmi and others
Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper Construction Co. (P) Ltd. and others
The court established that a sale agreement lacking necessary signatures and evidence of payment cannot be enforced for specific performance, but a partial refund of advance is permissible.
A sale agreement must be duly stamped and registered if it involves possession transfer; time is of the essence unless explicitly stated otherwise.
The court established that a sale agreement not duly registered is unenforceable, and time is essential in contracts unless explicitly stated otherwise.
The plaintiff's failure to prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract precludes specific performance, but the first defendant must return the advance amount with interest.
Specific performance of a contract is a discretionary remedy that requires the plaintiff to prove readiness and willingness to perform their obligations within the stipulated time.
The plaintiff's failure to file the suit within the limitation period and to prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract resulted in dismissal of the specific performance claim.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the plaintiff to demonstrate readiness and willingness to perform an agreement of sale, and the court's discretion to consider ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.