Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.SATHISH KUMAR, R.SAKTHIVEL
C.N.Krishnan Padmakrishnan (died) – Appellant
Versus
G.N.Govindarajulu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background on the sale agreement and context. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. plaintiff's claims and defendants' dispute on endorsements. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. arguments made by appellants and respondents. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. discussion on endorsements and readiness. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. analysis of legal standing and limitations. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 6. court's findings on readiness and willingness. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 7. final decision and order. (Para 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT
Aggrieved over the decree and judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Hosur, in O.S.No.2 of 2006, dated 13.10.2017, granting specific performance, the present appeal has been filed by the defendants in the suit.
3.The following are the brief facts of the case :
4.It is the contention of the plaintiff that, in the written statement filed by the defendants 1 and 7 on 06.06.2005 in O.S.No.17 of 2000 filed by their brother for partition, they have categorically admitted about the execution of the sale agreement with the plaintiff (Ex.A1) and therefore, according to the plaintiff, the sale agreement and the right accrued to the plaintiff thereby is still alive and therefore, the suit is not
A party seeking specific performance must demonstrate continuous readiness and willingness; intervening litigation can justify delays without barring the suit.
The court affirmed that an endorsement extending the time for executing a sale agreement is valid, and that delays caused by a partition suit do not bar specific performance when the plaintiff demons....
The subsequent rise in price and the defendant's resistance were not valid grounds to deny the relief of specific performance. The trial court rightly exercised its discretion in granting the relief ....
The continuous readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to perform her part of the contract is a condition precedent to grant the relief of specific performance.
A sale agreement signed solely by the vendor is enforceable, and no fixed date of performance in an agreement allows suit filing within three years of notice of refusal.
Time is of the essence of a contract if the parties have agreed that it is or if the circumstances of the case show that it is.
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 prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform a contract for specific performance, which was not established in this case due to the failure to show evidence of intention a....
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
