Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL
Romesh Chander (since deceased) through LRs – Appellant
Versus
Bachittar Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AMARINDER SINGH GREWAL, J.
1. The present Regular Second Appeal has been preferred by the appellant–defendant challenging the judgment and decree dated 26.10.1989 passed by the learned 1st Appellate Court, Hoshiarpur, whereby the appeal preferred by the respondent-plaintiff was allowed and the suit for possession by way of specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 11.03.1985, in respect of land measuring 28 kanals 13 marlas situated in village Sasoli, Tehsil and District Hoshiarpur, was decreed, while setting aside the judgment and decree dated 28.04.1987 passed by the learned trial Court which had dismissed the suit for specific performance or, in the alternative, for recovery of Rs. 60,000/- as damages and refund of earnest money.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to in terms of their status before the trial court.
3. Succinctly, the facts of the case are that the plaintiff instituted the suit for possession by way of specific performance of an agreement to sell dated 11.03.1985 on payment of the balance sale consideration of Rs. 48,840/- or in the alternative for recovery of Rs. 60,000/- as damages. The case of the plaintiff is that the de
(1) Agreement to Sell – Suit for Specific Performance must be dismissed when it is based on an instrument that is legally inadmissible as evidence – Plaintiff cannot claim relief on the basis of a do....
The plaintiff must demonstrate both readiness and willingness to perform a contract for specific performance, including financial capacity, and agreements must be duly stamped to be enforceable.
Sale agreements must comply with statutory requirements, including proper execution and stamping; failure to demonstrate consensus or readiness negates claims for specific performance.
The court emphasized the importance of matching signatures, entitlement to raise the plea of readiness and willingness despite denying the execution of documents, the effect of material interpolation....
The court must determine the admissibility of documents based on the stamping requirements before relying on them in judgments, failing which can constitute a material irregularity.
The burden of proof for fraud allegations lies with the defendants, and mere allegations without evidence do not invalidate an agreement for specific performance.
The admission of an unstamped document in arbitration prevents later challenges based on its insufficiency, as established by Section 36 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
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
