Specific Performance – ‘Readiness’ & ‘Willingness’ Can’t Be Proved For First Time Before HC Through Affidavit Without Amending Pleadings

Case: K. Karuppuraj vs. M. Ganesan

Coram: Justices MR Shah and AS Bopanna

Case No: CA 6014-6015 OF 2021

Court observation: “…for the purpose of passing a decree for specific performance, readiness and willingness has to be established and proved and that is the relevant consideration for the purpose of passing a decree for specific performance”

“Once it is found on appreciation of evidence that there was no willingness on the part of the plaintiff, the plaintiff is not entitled to he decree for specific performance”

“The procedure adopted by the High Court relying upon the affidavit in a First Appeal by which virtually without submitting any application for amendment of the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, the High Court as a First Appellate Court has taken on record the affidavit and as such relied upon the same. Such a procedure is untenable and unknown to law”

“First appeals are to be decided after following the procedure to be followed under the CPC. The affidavit, which was filed by the plaintiff and which has been relied upon by the High Court is just contrary to the pleadings in the plaint. As observed hereinabove, there were no pleadings in the plaint that he is ready and willing to purchase the property and get the sale deed executed of the property with tenants and the specific pleadings were to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession after getting the tenants evicted and to execute the sale deed. The proper procedure would have been for the plaintiff to move a proper application for amendment of the plaint in exercise of the power under Order VI Rule 17 CPC, if at all it would have been permissible in a first appeal under Section 96 read with Order XLI CPC. However, straightaway to rely upon the affidavit without amending the plaint and the pleadings is wholly impermissible under the law. Therefore, such a procedure adopted by the High Court is disapproved”

[doc id=11088]

Previous Posts

Electricity Act – Additional Bill Raised By Distributor After Detecting Mistake Not Hit By 2 Years Limitation Under Section 56(2): Supreme Court

‘Fit Case To Be Included In Law School Syllabus’: Supreme Court On 5th Round Of Litigation Stalling Execution In 50 Yr. Old Suit

Dependent Cannot Seek Compassionate Appointment On Higher Post Than Held By Deceased Employee: Supreme Court

First Appellate Court Should Deal With All Issues And Evidence And Follow Procedure Under CPC: Supreme Court

Order VI Rule 4 CPC – Fraud, Misrepresentation Or Undue Influence Can’t Be Proved If Specific Pleadings Are Absent: Supreme Court Download Judgement