Specific Performance Of Contract Can Be Refused If Suit Wasn't Filed Immediately After Breach Though Within Limitation Period : Supreme Court

Update: 2024-05-27 06:22 GMT
Click the Play button to listen to article

Even though the limitation period for filing a suit for specific performance of a contract is three years, the Supreme Court held that every suit for specific performance of the contract filed within the period of limitation cannot be decreed. The court noted that the three-year limitation period for filing the suit for specific performance of the contract wouldn't grant liberty to a...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

Even though the limitation period for filing a suit for specific performance of a contract is three years, the Supreme Court held that every suit for specific performance of the contract filed within the period of limitation cannot be decreed.

The court noted that the three-year limitation period for filing the suit for specific performance of the contract wouldn't grant liberty to a plaintiff to file a suit at the last moment and obtain specific performance despite knowing about the breach of contract.

“In Saradamani Kandappan vs. S. Rajalakshmi & Ors., this Court held that every suit for specific performance need not be decreed merely because it is filed within the period of limitation by ignoring time limits stipulated in the agreement. The courts will also frown upon suits which are not filed immediately after the breach/refusal. The fact that limitation is three years does not mean that a purchaser can wait for one or two years to file a suit and obtain specific performance.”, the bench comprising Justices Pankaj Mithal and PK Mishra said.

In the present case, the plaintiff entered into an agreement with only one of the co-owners and thereafter sought extensions for the execution of the sale deed but did not prefer any suit though he was aware of the sale deed dated 14.05.1997 executed in favor of the third party and sent a legal notice on 30.05.1997 and even objected to the subsequent purchasers' application for mutation of their names in the revenue records on 20.08.1997 and refers to a meeting of the Gram Panchayat dated 06.12.1997, yet the suit was preferred, on 09.05.2000 on the last date of limitation.

The Judgment authored by Justice PK Mishra held that the appellant/plaintiff would not be entitled the discretionary relief of the specific performance of the suit due to his conduct for not preferring the suit within the reasonable time despite knowing the fact of the breach of the contract well before the filing of the suit.

Also From The Judgment: Specific Performance Suit Can't Be Decreed Based On Power Of Attorney Holder's Deposition About Plaintiff's Readiness & Willingness: Supreme Court

Case Title: RAJESH KUMAR VERSUS ANAND KUMAR & ORS., CIVIL APPEAL NO. 7840 OF 2023

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 407

Click here to read/download the judgment

Full View
Tags:    

Similar News