The Specific Relief Act, 1963
Section 16(c) r/w
The Limitation Act, 1963
Article 54
Specific performance of agreement of sale– The High Court has wrongly observed that the plaintiff has not produced any evidence to prove that he demanded the performance of sale after the execution of the agreement of sale. The filing of a suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale is governed by Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, read with Article 54 of the Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963.
The plaintiff has specifically averred in his plaint that he was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract under the agreement of sale dated 20.04.1993. It was also specifically stated that the plaintiff had been demanding that the first defendant receive the balance consideration of Rs. 58,800/and execute a regular registered sale deed at his cost, but the first defendant had been avoiding the specific performance of the agreement of sale. In light of this, in our considered opinion, all the formalities which are to be pleaded and proved by the plaintiff for getting a decree of specific performance have been fulfilled. Moreover, there cannot be any proof of oral demand. Be that as it may, we are satisfied from the evidence that the plaintiff had sufficient money to pay the balance consideration to the first defendant and was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract. In view of reasons, the impugned judgment of the High Court is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court stands restored. The appeals are allowed accordingly. .....Chennadi Jalapathi Reddy =VS= Baddam Pratapa Reddy, (Civil), 2022(1) [12 LM (SC) 28] ....View Full Judgment