NDLI: P. Meenakshisundaram Vs. P. Vijayakumar & Anr.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Specific performance:
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Specific performance: Appellant had mortgaged the suitproperty with a bank and the bank had initiated recoveryproceedings – Meanwhile, appellant entered into a sale agreementto sell the suit property to respondent no.1 and pursuant thereto,respondent no.1 made some payments also – Thereafter, disputearose between the parties and respondent no.1 filed suit forspecific performance – Trial Court held in favour of respondentno.1 and directed appellant to execute sale deed – High Courtdismissed the appeals holding that appellant had not disclosed aboutthe existence of encumbrance which came to the knowledge ofrespondent no.1 subsequently and that there was readiness andwillingness on the part of respondent no.1 – On appeal, held: Theunderstanding between the parties as on date when the saleagreement was entered into was reflected in a communication ofrespondent no.1 which clearly showed that the existence of theencumbrance was a well known fact – In the face of such clearunderstanding under which the suit agreement was entered into,the High Court completely erred in ignoring the entire case putforth on the part of the appellant – The facts on record disclosedthat there were recurring delays on part of respondent no.1 – Thereare no details in the plaint as to what exactly respondent no.1 haddone towards fulfillment of his obligations and completion of thetransaction – Further, there was an arrangement between theparties by which respondent no.1 was to make payment of Rs.13.5lakhs to the bank directly and Rs.6 lakhs to the appellant, however,the facts do not indicate any observance of these conditions – Infact, the amount of Rs.13.5 lakhs was independently deposited anddischarge was obtained by the appellant – Therefore, issue whetherrespondent no.1 was ready and willing to perform his part of thecontract is answered against him and suit for specific performance preferred by the respondent no.1 is dismissed – The case put up byrespondent no.1 that he was put in possession pursuant to anarrangement is also doubtful – If respondent no.1 was put inpossession of the suit property pursuant to the arrangement as inthe suit agreement, his corresponding obligation under sucharrangement was two fold namely to pay off the dues to the Bankdirectly and pay rest of the sum to the appellant – There is nothingon record which could be consistent with discharge of suchobligation on part of respondent no.1 – Appellant is entitled torecovery of possession – Possession.Specific performance: Readiness and willingness to performthe contract – Held: As regards suit for specific performance, thelaw is very clear that plaintiff must plead and prove his readinessand willingness to perform his part of the contract all through i.e.,right from the date of the contract till the date of hearing of the suit.
Judge	Honble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit
Neutral Citation	2018 INSC 289
Petitioner	P. Meenakshisundaram
Respondent	P. Vijayakumar & Anr.
SCR	[2018] 6 S.C.R. 667
Judgement Date	2018-03-28
Case Number	3353

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

P. Meenakshisundaram Vs. P. Vijayakumar & Anr.

Please Log-in to view this content

K.narendra Vs. Riviera Apartments (p) Ltd.

Basavaraj Vs. Padmavathi & Anr.

Coromandel Indag Products (p) Ltd. Vs. Garuda Chit & Trading Co. P. Ltd. & Anr.

Mukul Sharma Vs. Orion India (p) Ltd. Through Its Managing Director

R. C. Chandiok & Anr. Vs. Chuni Lal Sabharwal & Ors.

Nanjappan Vs. Ramasamy &anr

Alagammal and Ors Vs. Ganesan and Anr

K. Karuppuraj Vs. M. Ganesan

Thiruvengada Pillai Vs. Navaneethammal & Anr.

P. Meenakshisundaram Vs. P. Vijayakumar & Anr.

P. Meenakshisundaram Vs. P. Vijayakumar & Anr.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

K.narendra Vs. Riviera Apartments (p) Ltd.

Basavaraj Vs. Padmavathi & Anr.

Coromandel Indag Products (p) Ltd. Vs. Garuda Chit & Trading Co. P. Ltd. & Anr.

Mukul Sharma Vs. Orion India (p) Ltd. Through Its Managing Director

R. C. Chandiok & Anr. Vs. Chuni Lal Sabharwal & Ors.

Nanjappan Vs. Ramasamy &anr

Alagammal and Ors Vs. Ganesan and Anr

K. Karuppuraj Vs. M. Ganesan

Thiruvengada Pillai Vs. Navaneethammal & Anr.

P. Meenakshisundaram Vs. P. Vijayakumar & Anr.