N. SESHASAYEE, P. VADAMALAI
M. K. Srinivasan – Appellant
Versus
R. Ramasamy – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
N. SESHASAYEE. J.
PRAYER: Appeal filed under Section 96 of the Civil Procedure Code r/w Order 41 Rules 1 and 2 of C.P.C., against the judgment and decree dated 19.01.2016 in O.S.No. 6 of 2011 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Karur.
1. Challenging a decree dismissing their suit for specific performance in O.S.No. 6 of 2011 on the file of the Principal District Court, Karur, the plaintiffs therein have preferred the present appeal. Instead of granting a decree for specific performance, the learned District Judge has directed the first defendant to pay the plaintiffs the advance amount of Rs.50.0 lakhs which the plaintiffs had paid, with interest at 6% p.a. There is neither any cross objection, nor any cross appeal by the first defendant. For narrative convenience, parties would be referred to by their rank before the trial court.
2. A brief statement on the case of the plaintiffs may now be stated:
(b) On 06
The court affirmed that time is an essential term in contracts for specific performance, and failure to perform on the stipulated date justifies termination of the contract.
In a contract for sale with reciprocal promises, a buyer's obligation to perform arises only after the seller fulfills their pre-requisite duties. The seller's failure to perform their part constitut....
Continuous readiness and willingness to perform the contract is a condition precedent for obtaining the relief of specific performance under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act.
The readiness and willingness of the parties to perform their part of the contract, as per the agreement of sale, is crucial in determining the entitlement to the discretionary relief of specific per....
In a suit for specific performance, the plaintiff must demonstrate both readiness and willingness to perform the contract, and failure to do so within the stipulated time can bar the relief, regardle....
In a suit for specific performance, plaintiffs must prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform their part of the contract, supported by cogent evidence; mere assertions are insufficient.
Time is an essence of the contract in specific performance cases, and plaintiffs must prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform their obligations.
Time is of the essence in contracts for sale of immovable property; failure to act within stipulated time undermines claims for specific performance.
Plaintiff's failure to prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform contract negates entitlement to specific performance under Specific Relief Act.
The plaintiff's failure to prove readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract within the stipulated time precluded him from obtaining the relief of specific performance.
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.