Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. SAKTHIVEL
K. Prabakaran – Appellant
Versus
S. Boopathi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
This Second Appeal is directed by the first defendant in the Original Suit, who was unsuccessful before the Trial Court as well as the First Appellate Court. Challenge is to the Judgment and Decree dated July 16, 2018, passed in A.S.No.27 of 2016 by the 'Principal District Court, Vellore' [henceforth 'First Appellate Court'], confirming the Judgment and Decree dated February 16, 2016 passed in O.S.No.117 of 2006 by the 'Subordinate Court, Vellore' [henceforth 'Trial Court'].
2. For the sake of convenience, hereinafter, the parties will be referred to as per their array in the Original Suit.
PLAINTIFF'S CASE
3. The Suit Property absolutely belongs to the first defendant, whose sister is the second defendant. The first defendant and the plaintiff entered into Sale Agreement dated May 26, 2006 whereby the plaintiff agreed to purchase the Suit Property for a sum of Rs.4,75,000/-, of which, Rs.75,000/- was paid upfront as advance. As per the Sale Agreement, the first defendant had to execute Sale Deed on or before August 25, 2006 upon receiving the balance sale consideration.
3.1. While the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of the Sale Agreement, the first
The court ruled that a Sale Agreement was not effectively revoked, and the plaintiff was always ready to perform, necessitating specific performance.
Unilateral revocation of a sale agreement without clear notice is invalid; the plaintiff must demonstrate readiness to perform for specific performance to be granted.
A sale agreement remains valid unless clearly revoked; unilateral returns and notices do not suffice to terminate obligations when the other party shows readiness to perform.
Specific performance requires continual readiness and willingness to fulfill contractual obligations; consent from co-owners must be secured for the contract to be enforceable.
The plaintiff must establish continuous readiness and willingness to perform a contract to be entitled to specific performance under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act.
In a suit for specific performance, the Plaintiff must prove the genuineness of the agreement and his readiness to perform, failing which the suit must be dismissed.
Specific performance – Relief of specific performance is equitable remedy – Plaintiff have to necessarily show their readiness and willingness in performing their part of contract from date of agreem....
The court affirmed that specific performance can be granted when the execution of the sale agreement is proven and the plaintiff demonstrates readiness and willingness to perform their contractual ob....
A plaintiff must prove the validity of a sale agreement and show readiness and willingness to perform contractual obligations for specific performance.
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
