Case Note & Summary
The case involves a second appeal arising from a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell. The appellant, original defendant no.1, challenged the concurrent findings of the trial court and first appellate court decreeing the suit. The plaintiff-respondent claimed that the defendant agreed to sell property and that part consideration was paid, with additional payments made from time to time beyond what was recorded in the agreement. The courts below decreed the suit based on the plaintiff's production of a cheque for Rs.3,90,000/- at Exh.73 during his evidence, holding that this demonstrated readiness and willingness. The High Court framed substantial questions of law regarding the interpretation of Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, which requires a plaintiff to both aver and prove readiness and willingness. The court noted that mere production of a cheque without other evidence does not satisfy the requirement of proof. Additionally, the plaintiff's claim of additional payments beyond the agreement was not substantiated. The court also considered whether payment of balance consideration after decree could indicate readiness and willingness, holding that it cannot. The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgments of the courts below and dismissing the suit.
Headnote
A) Specific Relief - Readiness and Willingness - Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act, 1963 - The requirement of readiness and willingness under Section 16(c) mandates not only an averment but also proof thereof; mere production of a cheque during evidence without other evidence does not satisfy the test. (Paras 1-2) B) Specific Relief - Payment Beyond Agreement - Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act, 1963 - A plaintiff who claims that additional consideration was paid beyond what is reflected in the agreement but fails to prove such payment is not entitled to the discretionary relief of specific performance. (Paras 1-2) C) Specific Relief - Expression 'and prove' - Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act, 1963 - The expression 'and prove' in Section 16(c) requires the plaintiff to adduce evidence to demonstrate readiness and willingness, not merely to make an averment in the plaint. (Paras 1-2) D) Specific Relief - Payment After Decree - Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Payment of balance consideration after the suit is decreed cannot be considered as an action indicating readiness and willingness at the relevant time. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff's production of a cheque during evidence alone satisfies the requirement of proving readiness and willingness under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963; whether a plaintiff who claims additional payment beyond the agreement but fails to prove it is entitled to specific performance; what is meant by 'and prove' in Section 16(c); whether payment of balance consideration after decree can indicate readiness and willingness.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the second appeal, set aside the judgments and decrees of the courts below, and dismissed the suit for specific performance.
Law Points
- Readiness and willingness must be pleaded and proved
- Payment beyond agreement must be proved
- Discretion in specific performance
- Expression 'and prove' in Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act
