The judgment establishes the principles of specific performance under the Specific Relief Act and the requirements of legal necessity and readiness and willingness in the context of Hindu coparcenary property.

( 1 ) THE judgment in this appeal shall also govern disposal of First Appeal no. 70 of 1994, Smt. Krishnadevi v. Bramh swarup and others.

( 2 ) RESPONDENT-PLAINTIFF, Bhagwan swarup, had filed a Civil Suit No. 33-A/1991 for specific performance of contract on the ground that plaintiff is occupying a portion of the house No. 46/120 situated in Tamakhuwali ali, Madhogan], Lashkar, Gwalior, as a tenant and on 3-4-1981 deceased Dwarka Prasad, owner of the house entered into an agreement to sell this house to the plaintiff for Rs. 40,000/- out of which Rs. 20,000/- was paid on the same day as advance and Rs. 10,000/- were received on 2-8-1981 while the remaining amount of consideration was agreed to be paid at the time of execution of the sale-deed. It was also agreed that the seller would deliver vacant possession of the house after getting it vacated from the possession of other tenants and in case, if he fails to do so he would make a rebate of Rs. 5000/- from the amount of consideration for this purpose. Unfortunately, dwarka Prasad expired on 14-8-1981 and his widow, appellant Bhagwatibai refused to perform her part of contract even after service of notice on her which compelled the plaintiff to file the suit for specific performance.

( 3 ) THE appellant-defendant denied execution of any agreement between the parties and alleged that deceased was sick and could not properly read because of defective eyesight. In the circumstances the agreement, if any, is forged one. Dwarkaprasad had no legal necessity to set the house which is an ancestral property and secondly it would cause undue hardship to the appellant-defendant as the deceased left behind him his widow and an adopted son, Harishanker who had no other residence or any means of livelihood for their own.

( 4 ) APPELLANTS in the year 1991 had also filed a civil suit No. 34-A/91 for eviction from the rented portion of the house against respondent on the ground that they required the accommodation for their bonafide need of residence and also for arrears of rent which was resisted by the respondent on the ground that the sole owner of the house, deceased dwarkaprasad had entered into an agreement to sell the house and also to put him in possession after receiving the major amount of consideration which is subject matter of the civil suit No. 33-A/91 and, therefore, the question of vacating the house for the purpose of bonafide need does not arise.

( 5 ) THE learned trial Court by the impugned judgment granted the decree of specific performance in favour of the respondents while rejecting the suit of the appellant regarding bonafide need of the house against which aforesaid appeals have been filed on behalf of appellant.

( 6 ) LEARNED senior counsel of the appellant has contended that the house in dispute is situated in an important area of the business locality and in the heart of the city. Its valuation, at the time of alleged execution of the agreement was not less than Rupees One lac and in absence of any legal necessity on the part of the owner he had also no right to transfer the ancestral property without consulting other coparcenary members of the family. It can be noticed that instead of getting the agreement registered it has been got verified before the Executive Magistrate who had no authority to endorse the same and again without any necessity obtaining an affidavit in support of it and further getting a receipt of Rs. 10000/- executed immediately before the death of the deceased are some of the instances indicating that the agreement is forged one. It has also been argued that ordinarily no seller bears the responsibility of executing the sale-deed at his own costs which has been ascribed to him in the present case. The application for transfer of the electric supply connection in the name of purchaser bears the date prior to the execution of the agreement also indicate the pre-planned design on the part of the alleged purchaser to garb the propert