Back
SANJAY VASHISTH
Ashok Kapoor – Appellant
Versus
Santosh Rani – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sanjay Vashisth, J.
Present revision petition has been filed by the Judgment Debtors (JDs/petitioners herein), impugning the order dated 25.04.2023 (Annexure P-5), vide which, application dated 11.11.2021, filed by respondent No.1 [Decree Holder (DH)], for extending the time for deposit of the balance sale consideration within 10 working days, has been allowed.
Another order under challenge is dated 14.07.2023 (Annexure P-6), vide which, Executing Court dismissed the application dated 08.09.2021, filed by the petitioners (JDs) for declaring the agreement to sell rescinded under section 28(1) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (in short, 'Act of 1963').
2. Facts of the case are that DH - Santosh Rani filed a suit for possession by way of specific performance of agreement dated 04.09.2012, with a direction to the defendants to execute, and to register the sale-deed of the house/property measuring 375 sq. yards bearing M.C.J. No.4520, situated in the area of Mohalla Sainchran Jagraon, Tehsil Jagraon, District Ludhiana. Said suit was instituted on 26.09.2014, against (1) Sudha Kapoor, (2) Ashok Kapoor, (3) Jaisika, (4) Ruchi; and (5) Nandan Kapoor (now JDs).
Learned trial Court vi
The court retains jurisdiction to extend time for performance of a decree, but such extensions must be justified and considered alongside applications for rescission to ensure fairness.
Agreement to sell – Provisions to grant specific performance of agreement are quite stringent – Equitable considerations come into play.
Rescission of contract – Application seeking rescission of contract or extension of time, under Section 28 (1) of Specific Relief Act, 1963 must be decided as application in original suit wherein dec....
The decree for specific performance remains executable despite delays in deposit of balance sale consideration, provided no rescission is sought by judgment debtors.
The court ruled that the application for extension of time for depositing sale consideration is valid, given the decree holder's consistent readiness and ongoing appeals affecting timelines.
The executing court has the authority to extend time for deposit of balance consideration in specific performance cases, but such discretion must be exercised judiciously, taking into account the rea....
The court affirmed that the executing court retains discretion to extend time for deposit of sale consideration under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, and the doctrine of merger applies to decr....
Point of Law : Provisions of section 28(1) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 in light of the provisions of Order XX Rule, 12A of the CPC, and it was held that the provisions of Order XX, Rule 12A mand....
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
