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

2021 Supreme(SC) 238

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, M.R. Shah, JJ.
Sukhbir – Appellant
Versus
Ajit Singh – Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 1653 of 2021
Decided on : 30-04-2021

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Sushil Sardana, Shafik Ahmed, Kaushal Yadav, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Rakesh Talukdar, Abhimanyu Tewari, Ankit Jaglan, Ashray Chopra, Advocates

IMPORTANT POINT
Plaintiff will be deemed to be in shoes of defendant and shall be entitled to amount of compensation, determined and awarded under provisions of Land Acquisition Act. Decree for compensation is passed as an alternate decree and in lieu of decree for specific performance.

Headnote:

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 21Contract Act, 1872 – Section 73 – Agreement to sell – Suit for specific performance – There are concurrent findings of fact recorded by all courts below on execution of agreement to sell by defendant in favour of plaintiff; payment of part sale consideration by plaintiff to defendant and readiness and willingness of plaintiff to pay balance sale consideration of Rs. 50,000/- – As such, plaintiff shall be entitled to decree for specific performance – However, in view of fact that before final decree could be passed by trial court, land in question came to be acquired under provisions of Land Acquisition Act – It cannot be said that High Court has committed any error in modifying decree for specific performance – Plaintiff will be deemed to be in shoes of defendant and shall be entitled to amount of compensation, determined and awarded under provisions of Land Acquisition Act – Decree for compensation is passed as an alternate decree and in lieu of decree for specific performance – Compensation determined and awarded under Land Acquisition Act may safely be taken into consideration – Plaintiff shall be entitled to entire amount of compensation awarded under Land Acquisition Act together with interest and Solatium – However, defendant-original land owner shall also be entitled to deduction therefrom of money value of services, time and energy expended in pursuing claims of compensation and expenditure incurred by him in litigation culminating in award – Ends of justice will be served if plaintiff is awarded entire amount of compensation determined under Land Acquisition Act together with interest and Solatium less payment towards balance sale consideration – Appellant-defendant shall be entitled to Rs. 3,00,000/- from amount of compensation deposited with acquiring body and balance amount of compensation together with interest and Solatium to be paid to original plaintiff. (Paras 7, 9, 10, 11 and 12)

Facts of the case:

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 23.09.2016 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.S.A. No. 4848/2016, by which the High Court has disposed of said second appeal modifying the judgment and decree for specific performance qua agreement to sell which was in favour of the original plaintiff to the extent holding that the respondent-original plaintiff shall be deemed to have stepped into the shoes of the vendor and shall be entitled to the entire amount of compensation along with Solatium and interest etc. owing to the acquisition of the land, the original defendant has preferred the present appeal. Short question which is posed for the consideration of this Court is, whether in facts and circumstances of case, High Court is justified in modifying the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial court for specific performance?

Findings of Court:

It cannot be said that the High Court has committed any error in modifying the decree for specific performance. As rightly held by the High Court, as such, the plaintiff will be deemed to be in shoes of the defendant and therefore shall be entitled to the amount of compensation, determined and awarded under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act.

Result : Appeal Partly allowed.

JUDGMENT

M.R. Shah, J.

Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 23.09.2016 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.S.A. No. 4848/2016, by which the High Court has disposed of the said second appeal modifying the judgment and decree for specific performance qua agreement to sell which was in favour of the original plaintiff to the extent holding that the respondent-original plaintiff shall be deemed to have stepped into the shoes of the vendor and shall be entitled to the entire amount of compensation along with solatium and interest etc. owing to the acquisition of the land, the original defendant has preferred the present appeal.

2. The facts leading to the present appeal in nutshell are as under:

That an agreement to sell was executed by the appellant - original defendant (hereinafter referred to as the 'defendant') in favour of the respondent - original plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as the 'plaintiff') on 9.3.2010 with respect to the land in question for a total sale consideration of Rs. 32 lakhs. That out of the total sale consideration of Rs. 32 lakhs, the plaintiff paid Rs. 31, 50,000/- to the defendant. That as per the agreement the sale deed was to be executed on 8.7.2010. Upon failure of the defendant to execute the sale deed, the plaintiff served a legal notice dated 13.7.2020 requesting the defendant to remain present at Sub-Registrar's office on 6.8.2010 to execute the sale deed. But instead of remaining present on the said date at the office of the Sub-Registrar, the defendant refused to do so on 4.8.2010. That thereafter the plaintiff instituted a suit on 5.8.2010 being Civil Suit No. RBT-34/2010 in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Jhajjar, Haryana for specific performance of the agreement to sell and to handover the possession of the land in question. By way of an alternative prayer, it was prayed for recovery of Rs. 31,50,000/- with interest @ 24% per annum from 9.3.2010 till the date of payment. That after the filing of the suit but before passing of the final decree, the land in question came to be acquired by the acquiring body for which a notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 6.7.2012. That the learned trial Court decreed the suit by judgment and decree dated 19.12.2012 and passed a decree for specific performance. That the learned trial Court specifically gave findings in favour of the plaintiff on the execution of the agreement to sell; readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff. That the learned trial Court directed the defendant to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff by receiving the balance sale consideration of Rs. 50,000/- and handover the possession of the suit property to the plaintiff. The judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court came to be affirmed by the learned first appellate court.

At this stage, it is required to be noted that before the learned trial court, it was not brought to the notice of the court that with respect to the land in question a notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act has been issued on 6.7.2012.

3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial Court, affirmed by the first appellate court, the defendant preferred second appeal before the High Court being R.S.A. No. 4848/2016. Before the High Court, it was submitted on behalf of the defendant that in view of the fact that the land in question has been acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, the defendant has no saleable right and interest in the suit property and therefore the agreement to sell cannot be executed. Submissions on merits were also made on behalf of the defendant on the findings recorded by the learned trial court on execution of the agreement to sellby the defendant in favour of the plaintiff; accepting Rs. 31,50,000/- by way of part sale consideration; and readiness and willingne

    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