Supreme Court of India Judgements

46650 Judgements hosted as on 11/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Specific Performance

Specific Performance

Specific performance of Agreement – Not to grant the decree of specific performance despite the execution of the agreement to sell is proved; part sale consideration is proved and the plaintiff is always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract would encourage the dishonesty. In such a situation, the balance should tilt in favour of the plaintiff rather than in favour of the defendant – executant of the agreement to sell, while exercising the discretion judiciously. HELD Section 10(a) and now the specific performance is no longer a discretionary relief. As such the question whether the said provision would be applicable retrospectively or not and/or should be made applicable to all pending proceedings including appeals is kept open. However, at the same time, as observed hereinabove, the same can be a guide.

Oct 30, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUGHAR SINGH — Appellant Vs. HARI SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. )…

Specific Performance

Land Acquisition – Specific performance – Power to award compensation-Decree for compensation is passed as an alternate decree and in lieu of the decree for specific performance – High Court has rightly observed and held that the plaintiff shall be entitled to the entire amount of compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition Act together with interest and solatium.

May 2, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUKHBIR — Appellant Vs. AJIT SINGH — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M.R. Shah, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 1653…

Specific Performance

A suit for specific performance cannot be dismissed on the sole ground of delay or laches – Escalation of prices cannot be the sole ground to deny specific performance -However, an exception to this rule is where an immovable property is to be sold within a certain period, time being of the essence, and it is not found that owing to some default on the part of the plaintiff, the sale could not take place within the stipulated time.

Apr 11, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH A.R. MADANA GOPAL ETC.ETC. — Appellant Vs. M/S RAMNATH PUBLICATIONS PVT. LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and S.…

Specific Performance

Suit for specific performance filed within limitation cannot be dismissed on the sole ground of delay or laches. HELD discretion of the Court whether some additional amount ought or ought not to be paid by the plaintiff once a decree of specific performance is passed in its favour, even at the appellate stage.

Oct 18, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH FERRODOUS ESTATES (PVT.) LIMITED — Appellant Vs. P. GOPIRATHNAM (DEAD) AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman and Navin Sinha, JJ. )…

Specific Performance

Clever ploys cannot always pay dividends. HELD a short-cut was found by the petitioner/plaintiff to retain the plaint as such, but to seek permission to pay deficit court fee, as though what was filed in the first instance was actually a suit for specific performance. Such a dubious approach should not be allowed .

Feb 10, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ATMA RAM — Appellant Vs. CHARANJIT SINGH — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Special Leave Petition (C) No.27598…

Specific Performance

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Section 115 – Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 20 – Decree of possession by way of specific performance of the Agreement of Sale – Where the defendant No.2 (the appellant herein) had contested the suit and had put forth the contention that he was a bonafide purchaser without notice HELD the Courts below have on the contrary concluded that the defendants No.1 and 2 being of the same village, the defendant No.2 would have knowledge of the agreement entered into by the defendant No.1 in favour of the plaintiff – Such conclusion is only an assumption

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUKHWINDER SINGH — Appellant Vs. JAGROOP SINGH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Specific Performance

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 15 – Suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale – When a person concerned knew the right position relating to the title in property in his possession, he could not plead that he was induced to hold an erroneous belief because of the conduct of real owner of that property

Oct 27, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SIRDAR K.B. RAMACHANDRA RAJ URS. (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. — Appellant Vs. SARAH C. URS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra and…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw