Law: Specific Relief Act, 1877

Section: 12

Specific Relief Act ( I of 1877 )--- ----S.12---Suit for specific performance of agreement to sell immoveable property---Specific performance---Equitable relief---Scope--- Contumacious conduct of plaintiff---Effect---Contention of the appellant/plaintiff was that she could not deposit balance sale consideration as some of the share-holders were abroad and that her counsel did not affix the court fee---Held, that it was own claim of the appellant/plaintiff that huge amount (of six crore) was outstanding on her part as balance sale-consideration---Mandatory for the party (plaintiff or defendant who sought enforcement of agreement under the Specific Relief Act, 1877, that the balance amount be deposited in the Court on the first appearance or on the date after the institution of the suit as per the permission of Court and any omission in said regard would entail dismissal of suit---When the time, fixed in the agreement to sell, approached the plaintiff should have been ready to show her willingness for performance of the sale agreement /plaintiff was to show his/her bona fide by depositing the total sale consideration in the Court to demonstrate her readiness and willingness for performance of the sale agreement and any contumacious omission in said regard would entail dismissal of the suit for specific performance being an equitable relief---Trial Court, in the present case, specifically directed the appellant to deposit balance consideration amount along with proper court fee as per valuation of the suit within a period of two months, but neither balance amount nor court-fee was affixed by the appellant---Conduct of the appellant showed that she was not serious in performing her agreed part of contract or in pursuing her remedy of specific performance---Said conduct of the appellant on the touchstone of equitable principles on the subject, disentitled the appellant of equitable relief of specific performance---Contention of appellant that some of the share-holders were living abroad would not absolve her as no share-holder was even party to the lis---Conduct of the appellant was contumacious in not depositing the balance consideration amount, he was lawfully…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492