U.N. KRISHNAMURTHY (SINCE DECEASED) THR. LRS. versus A. M. KRISHNAMURTHY

Citation: [2022] 13 S.C.R. 250 · Decided: 12-07-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: INDIRA BANERJEE · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · cites 10 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
250
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 13 S.C.R.
U.N. KRISHNAMURTHY (SINCE DECEASED) THR. LRS.
v.
A. M. KRISHNAMURTHY
(Civil Appeal No. 4703 of 2022)
JULY 12, 2022
[INDIRA BANERJEE AND HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.]
Specific Relief Act, 1963 – s.16 (prior to amendment w.e.f
1.10.2018) – Readiness and willingness to perform – Both
ingredients necessary for the relief of specific performance – Suit
for specific performance of an agreement for sale – Certain amount
paid in advance, failure to pay balance within stipulated time –
Grant of relief – Not justified – Held: There is a distinction between
readiness and willingness to perform the contract and both
ingredients are necessary for the relief of Specific Performance –
Plaintiff has to prove that all along and till the final decision of the
suit, he was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract –
Mere statement or averment in plaint of readiness and willingness
would not suffice – In the present case, the respondent-plaintiff
failed to prove his readiness to perform his part of contract from
the date of execution of the agreement till date of decree, a condition
precedent for grant of relief of specific performance – Respondent
deposited the balance sale consideration in the court seven years
after the date by which the sale had to be concluded – He did not
have sufficient funds to discharge his part of contract – No evidence
was adduced as to how he was in a position to pay or make
arrangements for payment of the balance sale consideration within
time – Making subsequent deposit of balance consideration after
lapse of seven years would not establish the respondent’s readiness
to discharge his part of contract – Respondent was not entitled to
the relief of specific performance as he was not ready with funds
though may have been willing to perform his part of contract –
Impugned judgment of High Court and the decree of Trial court set
aside – Appellants-defendant to return the earnest money to the
respondent with interest @ 7% p.a from the date of deposit of the
same, till the date of refund.
[2022] 13 S.C.R. 250
250
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
251
Suit – For specific performance of an agreement – Certain
amount paid in advance, balance to be paid within a stipulated
time – Held: In a suit for Specific Performance of an agreement, it
is for the Plaintiff to prove his readiness and willingness to perform
his obligations under the agreement – Where a certain amount has
been paid in advance and the balance is required to be paid within
a stipulated time, it is for the Plaintiff to show that he was in a
position to pay the balance money – Plaintiff has to prove that he
has the money or has alternatively made necessary arrangements
to get the money.
Suit – For specific performance– Continuous readiness and
willingness of plaintiff – Held: Even in a first appeal, the first
Appellate Court is duty bound to examine whether there was
continuous readiness and willingness on the part of the Plaintiff to
perform the contract.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The primary question for determination is
whether the Respondent Plaintiff has proved his readiness and
willingness to perform his part of the contract or not? In a suit
for Specific Performance of an agreement, it is for the Plaintiff to
prove his readiness and willingness to perform his obligations
under the agreement. Where a certain amount has been paid in
advance and the balance is required to be paid within a stipulated
time, it is for the Plaintiff to show that he was in a position to pay
the balance money. The Plaintiff has to prove that he has the
money or has alternatively made necessary arrangements to get
the money. In this case, the Original Defendant/Appellants have
all along contended that the Plaintiff Respondent neither offered
to pay nor was in a position to pay the balance consideration of
Rs.15,00,000/-. [Paras 21, 22][260-F-H]
1.2 Section 16 (c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 bars the
relief of specific performance of a contract in favour of a person,
who fails to aver and prove his readiness and willingness to
perform his part of contract. In view of Explanation (i) to clause
(c) of Section 16, it may not be essential for the plaintiff to actually
tender money to the defendant or to deposit money in Court,
U.N. KRISHNAMURTHY (SINCE DECEASED) THR. LRS. v.
A. M. KRISHNAMURTHY
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
252
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 13 S.C.R.
except when so directed by the Court, to prove readiness and
wi

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.