SC: Public Premises Act Prevails over State Rent Laws For Evicting Unauthorised Occupants  ||  SC: Doctors Were Unwavering Heroes in COVID-19, and Their Sacrifice Remains Indelible  ||  SC Sets Up Secondary Medical Board to Assess Passive Euthanasia Plea of Man in Vegetative State  ||  NCLAT: Amounts Listed As ‘Other Advances’ in Company’s Balance Sheet aren’t Financial Debt under IBC  ||  NCLT Ahmedabad: Objections to Coc Cannot Bar RP From Challenging Preferential Transactions  ||  J&K&L HC: Courts Should Exercise Caution When Granting Interim Relief in Public Infrastructure Cases  ||  Bombay HC: SARFAESI Sale Invalid if Sale Certificate is Not Issued Prior to IBC Moratorium  ||  Supreme Court: Police May Freeze Bank Accounts under S.102 CrPC in Prevention of Corruption Cases  ||  SC: Arbitrator’s Mandate Ends on Time Expiry; Substituted Arbitrator Must Continue After Extension  ||  SC: Woman May Move Her Department’s ICC For Harassment by Employee of Another Workplace    

P. Ramasubbamma vs. V. Vijayalakshmi & Ors. - (Supreme Court) (11 Apr 2022)

Once execution of agreement to sell and payment of sale consideration is admitted by vendor, nothing further is required to be proved by vendee

MANU/SC/0449/2022

Civil

The Appellant herein original plaintiff has preferred the present appeal against impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court, by which the High Court has set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court granting decree for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 12th April, 2005.

Fact that original defendant No. 1 – vendor – original owner admitted the execution of agreement to sell dated 12th April, 2005 and even admitted the receipt of substantial advance sale consideration, the learned Trial Court decreed the suit for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 12th April, 2005. Once the execution of agreement to sell and the payment/receipt of advance substantial sale consideration was admitted by the vendor, thereafter nothing further was required to be proved by the plaintiff – vendee. Therefore, as such the learned Trial Court rightly decreed the suit for specific performance of agreement to sell.

The High Court, was not required to go into the aspect of the execution of the agreement to sell and the payment/receipt of substantial advance sale consideration, once the vendor had specifically admitted the execution of the agreement to sell and receipt of the advance sale consideration; thereafter no further evidence and/or proof was required.

The High Court has committed a grave error in reversing the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court by ignoring the vital facts of the case which are either admitted or proved in the instant case. The impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is set aside and the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court is restored. Appeal allowed.

Tags : SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE   AGREEMENT   EXECUTION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved