HARKESH MANUJA
Bachittar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Sukhdev Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Mr. Harkesh Manuja, J. (Oral)
By way of present appeal, challenge has been laid to the judgments and decrees dated 16.03.2018 and 03.01.2023 passed by the Courts below; whereby a suit for possession by way of specific performance, filed at the instance of respondent / plaintiff has been decreed.
2. Briefly stating, based on an agreement to sell dated 08.11.2010, the respondent / plaintiff filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance against appellant-defendant. It was pleaded therein that the total sale consideration was Rs. 8,00,000/-; out of which Rs. 2 lacs was paid as earnest money; 08.11.2011 being the target date, though later extended up to 10.05.2012. However, the appellant/ defendant failed to get the sale deed executed thereby compelling the respondent/ plaintiff to file the suit for possession by way of specific performance.
3. Upon notice, the appellant/ defendant appeared and disputed the factum of execution of agreement to sell by pleading it to be forged and fabricated document.
4. The trial Court vide judgment and decree dated 16.03.2018 decreed the suit in favour of respondent/ plaintiff. Aggrieved thereof, the appellant/ defendant filed first
The importance of obtaining expert opinion to prove the genuineness of a document and the discretionary nature of specific performance.
The burden of proof in specific performance cases lies with the parties, and the plaintiff's readiness and willingness to perform the contract are crucial.
The court affirmed that a plaintiff seeking specific performance must prove valid execution of the agreement and continuous readiness to perform contractual duties, which the plaintiff successfully d....
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.