Case Note & Summary
The appellant/plaintiff, K. Eswaran, filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement dated July 24, 2014, whereby the first defendant, S. Janakiraman, agreed to sell a property for Rs.14,00,000 and received an advance of Rs.3,00,000. The agreement stipulated that the sale deed would be executed within three months, i.e., on or before October 24, 2014. The plaintiff alleged that he was always ready and willing to pay the balance consideration of Rs.11,00,000, but the first defendant failed to produce the original title deeds and postponed the transaction. The plaintiff issued a legal notice on October 11, 2014, calling upon the first defendant to perform his part. The first defendant replied falsely claiming that the agreement was executed as security for a loan of Rs.50,000 taken from the plaintiff's father, and that an unregistered mortgage deed dated August 16, 2012 existed. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding that the plaintiff failed to prove readiness and willingness and that the suit was barred by limitation. On appeal, the High Court examined the evidence, including the sale agreement, legal notice, reply notice, and the plaintiff's testimony. The court found that the plaintiff had consistently demonstrated readiness and willingness by issuing the legal notice within the stipulated time and by depositing the balance consideration in court. The court also noted that the first defendant's plea of the agreement being a security for loan was not supported by credible evidence. The High Court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the suit and that the plaintiff was entitled to specific performance. The court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court's judgment, and decreed the suit for specific performance, directing the defendants to execute the sale deed within two months upon payment of the balance consideration.
Headnote
A) Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 16(c) - Readiness and Willingness - Plaintiff must plead and prove continuous readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract from the date of agreement till the date of decree - The court held that the plaintiff's conduct, including issuance of legal notice and deposit of balance consideration, demonstrated readiness and willingness, and minor discrepancies in pleadings do not defeat the claim (Paras 10-15). B) Contract Act, 1872 - Section 55 - Time not essence of contract for immovable property - In agreements for sale of immovable property, time is not ordinarily of the essence unless expressly stipulated and the intention is clear - The court held that the three-month period for execution of sale deed was not intended to make time the essence, and the plaintiff's readiness within that period was sufficient (Paras 16-18). C) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 101 - Burden of Proof - The burden lies on the plaintiff to prove readiness and willingness, but once the plaintiff adduces evidence of the agreement and his conduct, the burden shifts to the defendant to show non-performance - The court found that the plaintiff discharged his burden by proving the agreement, advance payment, and legal notice (Paras 19-22).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff has proved his readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract and is entitled to the relief of specific performance of the sale agreement.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The judgment and decree dated January 24, 2020 in O.S. No.27 of 2014 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Court, Mayiladuthurai, are set aside. The suit is decreed for specific performance. The defendants are directed to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, upon payment of the balance sale consideration of Rs.11,00,000 by the plaintiff. In default, the plaintiff is entitled to get the sale deed executed through the court. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
Law Points
- Specific performance
- Readiness and willingness
- Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act
- 1963
- Sale agreement
- Advance payment
- Legal notice
- Reply notice
- Unregistered mortgage
- Power of attorney
- Burden of proof
- Plaintiff's conduct
- Time is not essence of contract for immovable property
