Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
RITU TAGORE
Mahender Singh (Since Deceased) – Appellant
Versus
Rattan Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RITU TAGORE, J.
1. This common order shall dispose of above captioned revision-petitions arising out of the same Execution Petition No. 61 of 2022 titled as Rattan Singh vs. Mahender Singh and Others .
2. Both captioned revision-petitions are directed against the order dated 19.01.2024 (Annexure P-7) passed by learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Safidon, District Jind, wherein objection applications (Annexure P-5) filed by Trilok Singh, Gagandeep and Mandeep S/o Trilok Singh and petition under Section 28 of The SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT 1963, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) filed by Mahender Singh, have been dismissed and further directed the decree-holder (present respondent) to pay balance sale consideration of Rs. 4,11,875/- within two months of the order, excluding the cost of the suit for execution of the sale deed.
3. Both the parties have agreed and consented to decide the above revision- petitions together, involving similar questions of law.
4. Relevant facts necessary for adjudication are as under:
Mahender Singh through his LRs and others are the petitioners in above revision-petitions. Respondent, Rattan Singh, filed a Civil Suit No.28 dated 29.01
The obligation under a decree for specific performance primarily lies with the judgment-debtor to execute the deed, while the decree-holder's readiness must be established, affirming the non-applicab....
A party seeking specific performance must have clean hands; failure to disclose subsequent agreements does not negate execution of prior decrees, provided timelines for compliance are met.
The court established that under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, the trial court retains jurisdiction to extend time for compliance and to rescind contracts based on equitable considerations.
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.
The executing court retains jurisdiction to extend time for compliance with a decree for specific performance, even amidst an application for rescission, particularly when the judgment debtor's inact....
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....
Applications for rescission of contracts must be made in the same suit where the decree was issued, not in execution proceedings.
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
