December 3, 2025 2:42 pm

Specific Relief Act

When a higher court’s decree is issued, the lower court’s decree merges into it, and any time stipulations in the lower court’s decree do not automatically revive upon the higher court’s judgment

Bysclaw

Jan 19, 2025

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.

By sclaw

Related Post

C P C Registration Act Specific Relief Act Transfer Of Property Act

Registration Act, 1908 — Section 17(1)(e) — Compulsory registration of non-testamentary instruments — Assignment of a decree for specific performance of an agreement of sale of immovable property — Whether such assignment deed requires compulsory registration — HELD NO – A decree for specific performance of a contract for sale of immovable property does not, of itself, create any right, title, or interest in or charge on the immovable property (Section 54, Transfer of Property Act, 1882)

Nov 22, 2025 sclaw

Specific Relief Act

Refund of earnest/advance money requires specific pleading under S. 22(2) Specific Relief Act, even if specific performance is refused; forfeiture of earnest money is generally permissible upon purchaser’s default. Shree Hanuman Cotton Mills v. Tata Air Craft Ltd., (1969) 3 SCC 522 — Principles reiterated.; Videocon Properties Ltd. v. Bhalchandra Laboratories, (2004) 3 SCC 711 — Followed. ; Satish Batra v. Sudhir Rawal, (2013) 1 SCC 345 — Followed and applied. ; Central Bank of India v. Shanmugavelu, (2024) 6 SCC 641 — Followed.; Fateh Chand v. Balkishan Dass, 1963 SCC OnLine SC 49 — Distinguished regarding earnest money; Applied regarding penalty.; Maula Bux v. Union of India, (1969) 2 SCC 554 — Distinguished regarding earnest money; Applied regarding penalty.; Kailash Nath Associates v. DDA, (2015) 4 SCC 136 — Considered and distinguished on facts.; Godrej Projects Development Ltd. v. Anil Karlekar, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 222 — Cited.

May 4, 2025 sclaw

Specific Relief Act

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 6 – Suit by person dispossessed of immovable property – The appellants, owner of the property, allegedly evicted the respondent illegally and by force – The main issue was the maintainability of the suit under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, and the illegal dispossession – The appellants contended voluntary handover of possession and challenged the maintainability of the suit – The respondent filed a suit within six months of dispossession under Section 6 of the Act – The Trial Court decreed in favor of the respondent, and the High Court dismissed the appellant’s revision – The High Court concurred with the Trial Court on the illegal dispossession and maintainability of the suit – The appeal was dismissed based on concurrent findings and evidence on record – The Supreme Court found no merit in the appeal and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw

Categories

Archives

You missed

Constitution Environment

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Right to Life and Healthy Environment — Environmental Degradation: Pollution of Jojari, Bandi, and Luni Rivers in Rajasthan due to untreated industrial effluents and municipal sewage threatens the lives of 2 million people and the ecosystem — This constitutes a gross dereliction of constitutional duty and a direct constitutional injury — The right to a healthy environment, including pollution-free water and air, is an indispensable facet of the right to life under Article 21, reinforced by Articles 48A and 51A(g) — Judicial intervention is warranted when environmental degradation strikes at the foundation of these guarantees. (Paras 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 28)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6), Section 11(12)(a), Section 2(1)(f), Section 2(2) — Applicability of Part I, including Section 11, to International Commercial Arbitration (ICA) — Dispute arising from a Buyer and Seller Agreement (BSA) where Respondent No. 1 is foreign company (incorporated in Benin) — BSA stipulates arbitration “will take place in Benin” and is governed by laws of Benin — Held: Dispute is an ICA under Section 2(1)(f) — Under Section 2(2), Part I of the Act applies only where the place of arbitration is in India — Designation of Benin as the place of arbitration, coupled with choice of Benin law as governing/curial law, unequivocally establishes Benin as the juridical seat — Indian Courts lack jurisdiction under Section 11 to appoint an arbitrator for a foreign-seated arbitration — Petition seeking appointment of an arbitrator in India is fundamentally misconceived and legally untenable. (Paras 2, 23, 24, 25, 26, 30)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

Government Contracts and Tenders — Letter of Intent (LoI) — Legal Nature — An LoI is ordinarily a precursor to a contract, indicating intent to enter into a future agreement, but does not itself create a concluded contract or vested, enforceable rights unless the necessary preconditions are satisfied — A bidder’s commercial expectation that a contract will follow an LoI is not a juridical entitlement — If the LoI explicitly stipulates conditions precedent (like compatibility testing, live demonstration, and cost disclosure) before execution of an agreement/final award letter, the LoI remains provisional and conditional until such prerequisites are met. (Paras 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) — Section 7 — Application by Financial Creditor — Rejection for technical defects — Affidavit Verification — Whether an application under Section 7 of the IBC, verified later than the date of the supporting affidavit, is liable to be rejected at the threshold — Mere filing of a ‘defective’ affidavit (e.g., dated before application verification) does not render the Section 7 application non est and liable to be rejected; such a defect is curable and not fundamental. (Paras 1, 17)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw