SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 5335

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Smt Justice Rajani Dubey, Sachin Singh Rajput, JJ
SMT. SAVITA SHUKLA – Appellant
Versus
SMT. SHWETA MISHRA – Respondent
FA/47/2024



Mr. H. B. Agrawal, Sr. Adv along with Ms. A. Sandhya Rao, Adv; Mr. B. P. Sharma, Mr. K. N. Singh, Advocates

The court affirmed that the plaintiff demonstrated readiness and willingness to perform the contract, warranting specific performance despite defendants' objections.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section 96 - Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Agreement for sale - Plaintiff sought specific performance of an agreement dated 07.04.2019 for undivided property - Trial Court decreed suit, affirming plaintiff's readiness and willingness to perform - Defendants contested execution and terms of agreement - Court found evidence supported plaintiff's claims. (Paras 1, 3, 7, 12, 13)

(B) Specific Performance - Readiness and Willingness - The plaintiff must demonstrate readiness and willingness to perform the contract, which was established through notices and evidence presented. (Paras 11, 12)

Facts of the case:
The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of a contract regarding undivided property, claiming that the deceased defendant failed to execute the sale deed despite receiving advance payment. The trial court found in favor of the plaintiff.

Findings of Court:
The trial court held that the plaintiff had established her case for specific performance and was ready and willing to execute the agreement.

Issues: The main issues included whether the agreement was executed, the plaintiff's readiness and willingness, and entitlement to specific performance.

Ratio Decidendi: The court affirmed that the plaintiff's evidence demonstrated readiness and willingness to perform the contract, and the defendants' objections regarding the agreement's terms were not substantiated.

Result: Appeal dismissed.

C A V Judgment

Per Sachin Singh Rajput, J

1. This First Appeal has been filed under Section 96 of Civil Procedure by the appellants/defendant against the judgment and decree dated 31.01.2024 passed by 14th Additional District Judge, Raipur in Civil Suit No. 15-A/2020, whereby learned trial Court has allowed the suit filed by plaintiff/respondent, and directed the defendants /appellants to execute the agreement and also directed to plaintiff/respondent to pay remaining amount within two months and thereafter, registered sale deed has to be executed. Against this order the defendant/appellants have filed the present first appeal.

2. For the sake of convenience, the names of parties shall be referred to in terms of their status as per trial Court.

3. The brief facts as reflected from the record are that the respondent/plaintiff has filed the civil suit against the appellants claiming ¼th undivided property of Dr. Ashok Shukla, situated in Ward No.19, Shakti Bazar Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur, bearing land and building No.165/1 and mentioned in claim Schedule-A denoted by redline and BIJKLMNOFETC & V has filed civil suit for specific performance of contract vide agreement dated 07.04.2019 and also permanent injunction. Originally suit was filed by plaintiff against Dr. Ashok Shukla who during pendency of suit died and in place of him, the present appellants were made party. The case of plaintiff/ respondent is that Late Dr. Ashok Shukla and his brothers Dr. Arun Shukla, Ajay Shukla and sister-in-law Bharti Shukla w/o Late Ashwani Shukla were having the above suit land and building as per Schedule-A of the plaint, which was purchased by mother of defendants/ appellants Dr. Ashok Shukla during his lifetime by registered sale deed dated 31.08.1956. It is further contended that land and building share 1/5th share was taken by oral partition by co-owner Arun Shukla from his brothers and sister-in-law. The map annexed with plaint A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H & I is 815 sq.ft. in area after leaving that remaining part shown by red line and & BIJKLMNOFETC & V are the undivided land and building of Dr. Ashok Shukla, his sister-in-law Bharti Shukla, Arvind Shukla and Ajay Shukla jointly. The said undivided land was aggrieved to be sold by Ashok Shukla, his brothers and sister-in-law Bharti Shukla for Rs. 2 crore and paid advance of Rs. 5 lacs each have given 20 lacs and executed agreement dated 07.04.2019. The sale was to be executed upto 30.06.2019 after taking balance money. On 16.10.2019, deceased defendant Dr. Ashok Shukla, his sister-in-law Bharti Shukla and brothers Arvind Shukla and Ajay Shukla have executed the sale deed of undivided 3/4th share in the name of plaintiff and Smt. Vibha Tiwari. Since the name of Arun Shukla brother of deceased Dr. Ashok Shukla was also recorded in Government records, therefore, he has also filed agreement dated 07.04.2019 and he is also ready to sign at the time of execution and registration of the sale deed. It is further contended that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to abide by agreement dated 07.04.2019 and for this she also sent a notice through advocate on 18.06.2019 & 24.06.2019 to the defendants/ deceased Dr. Ashok Shukla, his brothers and sister-in-law to be present at the registration office on 29.06.2019 along with necessary documents for execution of sale deed. Even after that, the deceased defendant Dr. Ashok Shukla, his brother and sister-in-law did not appear at registration office. On 26.07.2019, the plaintiff again sent a notice to the deceased defendant Dr. Ashok Shukla, his brothers and sister-in-law to be present at registration office with necessary documents to execute the sale deed on 31.07.2019. The notice dated 26.04.2019 was replied by defendants through their advocate on 31.07.2019 and denied to sale their ancestral property. Again on 13.08.2019, 15 days time was given for execution of sale deed. It is further contended that on 16.10.2019, except Dr. Ashok Shukla remaining b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top