Back
KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA
Prem Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Gurudev Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Kshitij Shailendra, J.
1. The instant second appeal at the instance of defendants of Original Suit No. 169 of 1983 (Gurudev Singh v. Prem Kumar and others) arises from a suit for specific performance of an unregistered Agreement for Sale (in short 'AFS') in relation to an immovable property situated in District Meerut. The trial Court decreed the suit by judgment and order dated 20.10.1997, against which, the defendants filed Civil Appeal No. 84 of 1997 (Prem Kumar Sachdeva and another v. Gurudev Singh) which met the fate of dismissal by judgment and decree dated 25.1.2001.
Brief facts of the case
2. One Gurudev Singh instituted the suit in question, initially at Jullundur (now known as Jalandhar), State of Punjab, where it was registered as Original Suit No. 26 of 1980. Decree was claimed against three defendants on the basis of AFS dated 31.5.1977 qua land bearing Khasra Nos. 1035 and 1049 situated at Village Ghat, Pargana, Tehsil and District Meerut on the plea that defendants No. 1 and 2 had executed a registered power of attorney dated 24.4.1977 in favour of defendant No. 3-Puran Chand Sachdeva (in short 'PCS') authorizing him to enter into an AFS. An agreement was, acc
An unregistered Agreement for Sale cannot be enforced for specific performance under amended laws, and the plaintiff must prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform the contract.
An unregistered document can be admitted as evidence in a suit for specific performance to show a contract between the parties, and the plaintiff's continuous readiness and willingness to perform the....
An oral agreement for the sale of immovable property is unenforceable without a written and registered agreement under the Registration Act and Specific Relief Act.
The court emphasized the necessity for continuous proof of a party's readiness and willingness to perform contract obligations and that unregistered agreements impacting possession must be duly stamp....
An unregistered agreement to sell cannot serve as a basis for injunctive relief against a true owner of property, reflecting the necessity of registration under relevant laws.
An unregistered agreement to sell does not confer rights for specific performance; plaintiffs failed to show readiness and willingness to perform contractual obligations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the applicability of registration requirements under Section 17(1A) of the Indian Registration Act, 1908 and the limitations on filing a suit for s....
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
