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

VENKATACHALLIAH,M.N. (J)
JAGDISH SINGH – Appellant
Versus
NATTHU SINGH – Respondent


Advocates:
MANOJ SWARUP AND CO.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Page 1 of 10

PETITIONER:

JAGDISH SINGH

Vs.

RESPONDENT:

NATTHU SINGH

DATE OF JUDGMENT25/11/1991

BENCH:

VENKATACHALLIAH, M.N. (J)

BENCH:

VENKATACHALLIAH, M.N. (J)

AGRAWAL, S.C. (J)

CITATION:

1992 AIR 1604 1991 SCR Supl. (2) 567

1992 SCC (1) 647 1991 SCALE (2)1363

ACT:

Specific Relief Act, 1963: Section 21 (2), (4) &

(5)---Proviso.

Suit for specific performance--Acquisition of suit

properties during the pendency of second appeal--Effect

of--Nature of relief available to plaintiff--Power of Court

to grant compensation--Held where the contract becomes

impossible of performance for no fault of

plaintiff-----Court can award compensation in lieu and

substitution of specific performance--Measure of compensa-

tions by the standards of Section 73 of the Contract

Act--Scope of the Proviso explained--Distinction between

Indian Law and English law discussed.

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Section 100

Second Appeal--High Court--Power to reappreciate evi-

dence and disturb concurrent findings of fact----Held find-

ings of fact vitiated by no

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top