Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
K.MURALI SHANKAR
M.K. Kandasamy – Appellant
Versus
C. Ramasamy – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
K. MURALI SHANKAR, J.
The second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree made in A.S.No.12 of 2022, dated 15.06.2024 on the file of the Principal District Court, Karur, confirming the judgment and decree passed in O.S.No.229 of 2010, dated 05.04.2022 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Karur.
2. The appellant is the plaintiff. He filed a suit in O.S.No.229 of 2010 before the Principal Subordinate Court, Karur, seeking specific performance of agreement, dated 16.12.2009 or in alternative, to refund the advance amount with interest and cost.
3.Originally, the suit was filed against the first respondent and he filed the written statement and contested the suit. Pending suit, his son and daughter were impleaded as defendants 2 and 3, but they remained ex-parte. The learned Principal Subordinate Court, Karur, after framing necessary issues and after full trial, passed a judgment and decree, dated 05.04.2022, dismissing the suit with regard to the relief of specific performance, but granted the alternative relief directing the first defendant to return the advance amount of Rs.1,10,000/- with interest and costs. Aggrieved by the rejection of the specific per
High Court second appeal under S.100 CPC confined to substantial questions of law; cannot re-appreciate evidence or reverse findings on genuineness, readiness for specific performance.
The court held that the plaintiff must demonstrate readiness and willingness to perform the contract, and concurrent findings by lower courts are not to be disturbed without a substantial question of....
The High Court cannot re-assess evidence in second appeals, focusing only on substantial questions of law while confirming findings of lower courts.
To obtain a decree for specific performance, the plaintiff must prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract at all stages from the date of the agreement till the da....
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 held that a plaintiff must prove readiness and willingness in specific performance claims, and doubts regarding the authenticity of an agreement can lead to dismissal.
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.
The plaintiff must prove their readiness and willingness to perform the contract in order to be entitled to specific performance. A subsequent suit for specific performance is barred if the plaintiff....
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
