NCLAT: Can’t Dismiss Restoration App. if Filed in 30 Days from Date of Dismissal of Original App.  ||  Delhi HC: Communication between Parties through Whatsapp Constitute Valid Agreement  ||  Delhi HC Seeks Response from Govt. Over Penalties on Petrol Pumps Supplying Fuel to Old Vehicles  ||  Centre Notifies "Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Rules, 2025"  ||  Del. HC: Can’t Reject TM Owner’s Claim Merely because Defendant Could have Sought Removal of Mark  ||  Bombay HC: Cannot Treat Sole Director of OPC, Parallelly with Separate Legal Entity  ||  Delhi HC: Can Apply 'Family of Marks' Concept to Injunct Specific Marks  ||  HP HC: Can’t Set Aside Ex-Parte Decree for Mere Irregularity  ||  Cal. HC: Order by HC Bench Not Conferred With Determination by Roster is Void  ||  Calcutta HC: Purchase Order Including Arbitration Agreement to Prevail Over Tax Invoice Lacking it    

Jagjit Singh (D) thr. L.Rs. Vs. Amarjit Singh - (Supreme Court) (13 Sep 2018)

Plaintiff should plead and prove his readiness and willingness as a condition precedent for obtaining relief of grant of specific performance

MANU/SC/0982/2018

Civil

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.

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.

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.

Tags : AGREEMENT   PERFORMANCE   WILLINGNESS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved