The Supreme Court has observed that self-serving statements on income without any proof of financial resources is not sufficient to prove that plaintiff in a suit for specific performance was ready and willing to perform her part of the contract.
In this case, the plaintiff, in order to prove her readiness and willingness, produced in evidence the approval of loan by a bank. Apart from this, the other evidence was only a statement that plaintiff and her husband have income of Rs.80 lakhs per annum and this was not supported by any documentary evidence.
The Trial Court held that, though the Agreement to Sell was executed but the plaintiff has failed to prove her readiness and willingness to perform her part of the contract. The High Court, while dismissing the appeal held that that self-serving averments in the affidavit of the plaintiff and her husband cannot be taken as discharge of onus of proof of having financial capacity.
In Ritu Saxena v. J.S. Grover, while considering the plaintiff's appeal against concurrent findings of the High Court and the Trial Court, the bench comprising of Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice Hemant Gupta observed:
Such statement will be in the nature of ipsi dixit of the appellant and/or her husband and is without any corroborating evidence. Such self-serving statements without any proof of financial resources cannot be relied upon to return a finding that the appellant was ready and willing to perform her part of the contract. The appellant has not produced any income tax record or the bank statement in support of her plea of financial capacity so as to be ready and willing to perform the contract. Therefore, mere fact that the bank has assessed the financial capacity of the appellant while granting loan earlier in respect of another property is not sufficient to discharge of proof of financial capacity in the facts of the present case to hold that the appellant was ready and willing to perform her part of the contract.
Click here to Read/Download Judgment