Surinder Kaur vs Bahadur Singh
FACTS
Mohinder Kaur (Appelant), entered into an agreement with Bahadur Shah (Respondents) on 13.05.1964 to sell a piece of land for consideration of Rs. 5605/-, out of which Rs 1000/- was paid in advance the balance to be paid at the time of registration of sale deed. The possession was handed over to the purchaser at the date of agreement. On arrival of the decided time, Moinder failed to execute the sale deed and a suit of specific performance was filed. It was contended since Bahadur Singh failed to pay rent as per the agreement, he was not entitled to the decree.
LAWS INVOLVED
Section 16 (c) of the Specific Relief act lays that to sue for Specific Performance the beneficiary must prove readiness and willingness to complete their part of the transaction.
Section 51 1 of the Contract Act, 1872 provides that when a contract consists of reciprocal promises to be simultaneously performed, no promisor needs to perform his promise unless the promisee is ready and willing to perform his reciprocal promise.
ISSUES
Whether Bahadur Singh proved ready and willing to perform their part of the contract.
JUDGEMENT
The court ruled that Bahadur singh defaulted the rent payment for 13 years and denied any liability and therefore is not entitled to claim Specific performance. He by not paying the rent did not act fairly and, in our opinion, forfeited his right to get the discretionary relief of specific performance. The respondents were not able to prove readiness and willingness as is required by Section 16 (c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
-SAMBHAV
Comments