Fill in the following details to e-mail
To
Cc
Subject
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> </head> <body> <div style="font-family:Verdana, Geneva, sans-serif; font-size:12px; text-align:justify"> <table width="800" border="0" style="border:1px solid #ccc;padding:5px;" align="center" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0"> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> <br /> Supreme Court <br /><br /> Plaintiff should plead and prove his readiness and willingness as a condition precedent for obtaining relief of grant of specific performance<br /><br /> MANU/SC/0982/2018 - (13 Sep 2018)<br /><br /> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Jagjit Singh (D) thr. L.Rs. Vs. Amarjit Singh</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" style="background-color:#FDEDCE"><strong>The Plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of contract. The trial Court concluded that, no agreement to sell had been executed between the parties and accordingly dismissed the suit. Aggrieved, the Plaintiff filed an appeal. The first appellate Court set aside the finding of the trial court, however, the first appellate court concluded that, the so called agreement was, in fact, not an agreement to sell. It further held, that assuming that the said agreement was an agreement to sell, the Plaintiff had failed to prove that he was ready and willing to perform his part of the agreement. The appeal was consequently dismissed. The second appeal filed by the Plaintiff has been allowed by the High Court without framing any question of law much less a substantial question of law. <br><br> It is settled law that, a Plaintiff who seeks specific performance of contract is required to plead and prove that he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 mandates that the Plaintiff should plead and prove his readiness and willingness as a condition precedent for obtaining relief of grant of specific performance. It is the duty of the Plaintiff to plead and then lead evidence to show that, the Plaintiff from the date he entered into an agreement till the stage of filing of the suit always had the capacity and willingness to perform the contract. <br><br> In present appeal, the finding of the first appellate Court that, the Plaintiff had failed to plead or prove his willingness to perform his part of the contract from the date of agreement till filing of the suit is a pure finding of fact based on evidence and law. The High Court has while upsetting the judgment of the District Judge lost sight of the provisions of the Specific Relief Act and the law in this regard. Hence, the appeal is allowed, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and that of the lower appellate Court is restored.</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" ><strong></strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top" ><strong>Tags : Agreement, Performance, Willingness</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> </td> </tr> <tr> <!--<td><strong>Source : <a target="_new" href="http://www.manupatrafast.com/">newsroom.manupatra.com</a></strong></td>--> <td align="left" valign="top"><strong>Source : newsroom.manupatra.com</strong></td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> </td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Regards</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top">Team Manupatra</td> </tr> <tr> <td align="left" valign="top"> </td> </tr> </table> </div> </body> </html>