Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a suit for specific performance of a property sale agreement between the plaintiff and defendant. The plaintiff had agreed to purchase property for Rs. 16.20 lakhs, paying an advance of Rs. 3,60,001/-. The agreement required the defendant to evict tenants before executing the sale deed. The plaintiff filed a suit after the defendant failed to evict the tenants. The Trial Court dismissed the suit, finding the plaintiff not willing to purchase the property with tenants. The plaintiff appealed to the High Court, which quashed the Trial Court's decision and decreed the suit based on an affidavit from the plaintiff stating willingness to purchase with tenants. The defendant appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the High Court did not re-appreciate evidence or follow proper appellate procedures under the Code of Civil Procedure. The Supreme Court found that the High Court failed to comply with Order XLI Rule 31, which requires framing points for determination and discussing evidence. The Court emphasized that the plaintiff's willingness to purchase with tenants was not established in the original pleadings. The Supreme Court restored the Trial Court's dismissal of the suit but directed the defendant to refund the advance amount with interest. The appeals were allowed, and the High Court's judgment was quashed.
Headnote
A) Specific Performance - Readiness and Willingness - Requirement for Decree - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 96, Order XLI Rule 31 - The plaintiff must prove both readiness and willingness to perform the contract for specific performance. The Trial Court found the plaintiff not willing to purchase the property with tenants, leading to dismissal of the suit. The High Court's reliance on an affidavit stating willingness was improper as it contradicted the original pleadings. Held that the Trial Court's decision was justified (Paras 6-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in allowing the appeal and decreeing the suit for specific performance without re-appreciating evidence and framing points for determination.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, quashed the High Court's judgment, and restored the Trial Court's dismissal of the suit. The defendant was directed to refund Rs. 3,60,001/- with 18% interest within eight weeks.
Law Points
- Specific performance
- readiness and willingness
- appellate jurisdiction
- Order XLI Rule 31
- amendment of plaint
