Supreme Court of India Judgements

46420 Judgements hosted as on 27/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Specific Performance

Specific Performance

Refund of any earnest money – The litmus test appears to be that unless a plaintiff specifically seeks the refund of the earnest money at the time of filing of the suit or by way of amendment, no such relief can be granted to him – Prayer clause is a sine qua non for grant of decree of refund of earnest money. HELD nature of ‘earnest money’, the onus to prove that the same was ‘penal’ in nature squarely lies on the party seeking refund of the same –

Dec 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DESH RAJ AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. ROHTASH SINGH — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

C P C Specific Performance

Suit for specific performance – There was no specific issue framed by the learned Trial Court on readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff – There must be a specific issue framed on readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiff in a suit for specific performance and before giving any specific finding, the parties must be put to notice. Remanded

Nov 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH V.S. RAMAKRISHNAN — Appellant Vs. P.M. MUHAMMED ALI — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos. 8050-8051…

Specific Performance

Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell – Limitation had started running from the date the respondent noticed that the performance was refused by the appellant and not from the date of the execution of agreement in question – the compliance of “readiness and willingness” has to be in spirit and substance and not in letter and form, while making averments in the plaint. As per the Explanation (i) to Section 16(c), Specific Relief Act, 1963 – he need not tender to the defendant or deposit the amount in the court, but he must aver performance of, or readiness and willingness to perform the contract according to its true construction.

Oct 16, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH P. DAIVASIGAMANI — Appellant Vs. S. S AMBANDAN — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Specific Performance

Decree for specific performance – Agreement of sale provided that in the event the permission was not obtained within 75 days – permission not granted agreement cancelled by defendant rightly – on equity Rs 15000 paid in 1978 by plaintiff ordered defendant to pay Rs 15,00,000 to plaintiff-

Oct 9, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH KOLLI SATYANARAYANA (DEAD) BY LRS. — Appellant Vs. VALURIPALLI KESAVA RAO CHOWDARY (DEAD) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai…

Specific Performance

Unregistered agreement to sell on ten rupees stamp paper – Admissibility of — Suit for permanent injunction — Counter-claim seeking possession — Unregistered document/agreement to sell shall not be admissible in evidence – Plaintiff cleverly prayed for a relief of permanent injunction only and did not seek for the substantive relief of specific performance- Dismissed

Sep 25, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before: M.R. Shah & Krishna Murari, JJ. Civil Appeal No. 6733 of 2022 Decided on : 23.09.2022 Balram Singh – Appellant Versus Kelo Devi – Respondent…

Specific Performance

HELD by accepting the alternate relief claimed by the plaintiff of refund of the advance amount along with the interest @ 12% per annum. The High Court found suspicious circumstances and doubtful situations being raised by both the sides. The reasons given by the High Court as contained in paragraph 40, in our opinion, were sufficient to arrive at a conclusion of not awarding the relief of specific performance of contract

Aug 30, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH AYILLYATH YADUNATH NAMBIAR — Appellant Vs. P. SREEDHARAN — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No(s). 4943…

Specific Performance

Specific performance – There is no doubt that the claim of purchaser is hit by delay and laches on their part as they did not take appropriate measures within the stipulated time and filing of the suit was delayed by almost five years – It is not an appropriate case for granting relief to the purchaser in terms of Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 as the claim of the purchaser is barred by delay, laches and limitation.

Aug 28, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SMT. KATTA SUJATHA REDDY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. SIDDAMSETTY INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD.AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI., Krishna…

Specific Performance

Specific performance -There is a distinction between readiness and willingness to perform the contract and both ingredients are necessary for the relief of Specific Performance – While readiness means the capacity of the Plaintiff to perform the contract which would include his financial position, willingness relates to the conduct of the Plaintiff.

Jul 17, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH U.N. KRISHNAMURTHY (SINCE DECEASED) THR. LRS. — Appellant Vs. A. M. KRISHNAMURTHY — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. )…

Specific Performance

Specific performance of agreement – Agreement to sell – Three Courts below have recorded the concurrent findings of facts in favour of the respondent-plaintiff with regard to the respondent having proved his readiness and willingness to perform his part of contract, – Appeal dismissed

Apr 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SATNAM SINGH — Appellant Vs. SATNAM SINGH — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 8037…

You missed

State Laws

Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 – The case involves the acceptance of Change Reports for the Vahiwatdar (Administrator) and Trustees of Shri Mallikarjun Devasthan, a Public Trust – The High Court invalidated the acceptance and remanded the matters for reconsideration – The main issue was the delay in filing the Change Report for the new Vahiwatdar of the Trust, which was submitted 17 years after the previous Vahiwatdar’s death – The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment, confirming the acceptance of Change Report Nos. 899 of 2015 and 1177 of 2017, allowing the civil appeals – The Court found that the delay in filing the Change Report was a curable defect and did not impact the legitimacy of the new Vahiwatdar’s assumption of office – The Court emphasized a liberal approach to condonation of delay, citing precedents.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
Service

Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 – Sections 7, 8 and 9 – Procedure for resignation by employees of private schools – The appellant challenged his termination from, which was set aside by the Tribunal but reinstated by the High Court – The main issues were whether the appellant’s resignation was lawfully withdrawn and if the documents related to his resignation were fabricated – The appellant argued that his resignation withdrawal was not considered and that the school committee’s resolutions were fabricated – The respondents contended that the resignation was accepted by the management committee and the school committee, and the appellant was informed accordingly – The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, dismissing the appeal and affirming that the appellant’s resignation was voluntary and lawfully accepted – The Court found no evidence of fabricated documents and determined that the management committee’s acceptance of the resignation was valid – The Court referenced the MEPS Act and Rules, concluding that non-communication of resignation acceptance does not invalidate the termination – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant’s resignation was accepted before his attempted withdrawal, and thus the termination was lawful.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 5(7) – “financial creditor” – The appeals challenge judgments related to the status of certain creditors of M/s. Mount Shivalik Industries Limited under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) – The primary issue is whether the respondents are financial creditors or operational creditors within the meaning of the IBC – The appellants argue that the respondents are operational creditors, as the agreements indicate services rendered to promote the corporate debtor’s products – The respondents contend that the agreements were a means to raise finance, making them financial creditors due to the interest-bearing security deposits – The Court upheld the NCLAT’s decision, recognizing the respondents as financial creditors based on the commercial effect of the transactions – The Court examined the true nature of the transactions and found that the arrangements had the commercial effect of borrowing, satisfying the criteria for financial debt under the IBC – The Court applied the definition of financial debt and operational debt from the IBC, emphasizing the disbursal against the consideration for the time value of money – The appeals were dismissed, confirming the respondents’ status as financial creditors and allowing the resolution process to continue accordingly – The Court’s detailed analysis affirmed the NCLAT’s interpretation of the IBC provisions.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
Family Court I P C

“Husband Has No Right On Wife’s Stridhan” Matrimonial Law – The appeal concerns a matrimonial dispute involving misappropriation of gold jewellery and monetary gifts – The appellant, a widow, married the first respondent, a divorcee, and alleged misappropriation of her jewelry and money by the respondents – The core issue is whether the appellant established the misappropriation of her gold jewellery by the respondents and if the High Court erred in its judgment – The appellant claimed that her jewellery was taken under the pretext of safekeeping on her wedding night and misappropriated by the respondents to settle their financial liabilities – The respondents denied the allegations, stating no dowry was demanded and that the appellant had custody of her jewellery, which she took to her paternal home six days after the marriage – The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment, upheld the Family Court’s decree, and awarded the appellant Rs. 25,00,000 as compensation for her misappropriated stridhan – The Court found the High Court’s approach legally unsustainable, criticizing it for demanding a criminal standard of proof and basing findings on assumptions not supported by evidence – The Court emphasized the civil standard of proof as the balance of probabilities and noted that the appellant’s claim for return of stridhan does not require proof of acquisition – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant had established a more probable case and directed the first respondent to pay the compensation within six months, with a 6% interest per annum in case of default.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw