Back
S. SOUNTHAR
Mohanam – Appellant
Versus
Shanmugam – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S. SOUNTHAR, J.
Prayer: Second Appeal filed under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure Code, against the decree and judgment of the learned II Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vellore at Ranipet, Vellore District passed in A.S.No. 10 of 2016 dated 27.09.2016 reversing the decree and judgment of the learned Subordinate Judge, Ranipet, Vellore District passed in O.S.No. 89 of 2007, dated 17.09.2014 and to set aside the same.
1. The defendants 1 and 2 are the appellants. The first respondent filed a suit for specific performance and the same was dismissed by the trial Court. The First Appeal preferred by the first respondent was allowed and as a consequence, the suit was decreed. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants are before this Court.
2. According to the first respondent, he entered into suit sale agreement dated 21.10.2006 for purchase of agreement mentioned property at the rate of Rs.1,250/- per cent. The total extent of the agreement mentioned property was 2.60 acres. Thus the total sale consideration comes to Rs.3,25,000/-. The first respondent paid an advance of amount Rs.50,000/- to the appellants on the date of agreement itself. The time stipulated for completi
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....
The judgment establishes that specific performance can be granted when the plaintiff proves the execution of the contract and demonstrates readiness and willingness to perform, despite the defendant'....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for the plaintiff to prove the execution of the agreement of sale, payment of consideration, and continuous readiness and willingne....
The continuous readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to perform his part of the contract is a condition precedent to grant the relief of specific performance.
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.
The court affirmed that the burden of proving forgery lies with the party alleging it and upheld the validity of the sale agreement, reinforcing principles of specific performance in contract law.
A sale agreement must be proven by its written terms, and inconsistencies in evidence can undermine claims for specific performance.
The plaintiff's failure to prove readiness and willingness to perform the essential terms of the contract, as required by Sec. 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, influenced the Court's decision to set....
An agreement of sale signed by vendor alone and delivered to purchaser, and accepted by the purchaser, has always been considered to be a valid contract. In the event of breach by the vendor, it can ....
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
