Content Provider | Supreme Court of India |
---|---|
e-ISSN | 30484839 |
Language | English |
Access Restriction | NDLI |
Subject Keyword | 1908: s.100 - Second appeal Code of Civil Procedure interference on question of fact |
Content Type | Text |
Resource Type | Law Judgement |
Jurisdiction | India |
Case Type | Appeal |
Court | Supreme Court of India |
Disposal Nature | Appeal Allowed |
Headnote | Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: s.100 - Second appeal, interference on question of fact - When appreciation of evidence suffers from material irregularities and when there is perversity in the findings of the. court which are not based on any material, court is empowered to interfere on a question of fact as well - Unless and until there is absolute perversity, it would not be appropriate for the High Court to interfere in a question of fact just because two views are possible - Jn such circumstances, High Court should restrain itse(f from exercising the jurisdiction on a question of fact.S. J 00 - Substantial question of law - Agreement of sale of land - Stipulation in the agreement that the seller would conduct a ·survey for identification of the boundaries of the suit land - Non- compliance by the seller - Suit for specific performance - Trial court decreed the suit - Appellate court upheld the decree - Concurrent finding of two courts that the survey was not conducted by the seller - High Court set aside the judgment on the ground that buyer was unable to prove that suit land was not measured and demarcated by the seller - High court's order challenged on the ground that the same was beyond the scope of second appeal under s.100; that seller was not able to prove that survey was conducted which was condition precedent for payment of agreed consideration and that the buyer was ready and willing to perform his part of contract - On appeal, held: Perusal of various conditions stipulated in the agreement makes it clear that the reciprocal promises were dependent on each other - The view taken by High Court, regarding the interpretation of the contract wherein the execution of the contract was independent of the payment obligation, is erroneous and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law as the contract needs to be read as whole and not in piecemeal approach as undertaken bythe High Court - Therefore. the buyers payment obligation and theobligation to execute the contract, was dependent upon themeasurement to be conducted by the seller - DWl and DW2 statedthat the survey was conducted subsequent to the execution of the agreement, but no documents were marked on behalf of the sellerevidencing this fact - When both the courts below took a view thatevidence of the witness was not believable on detailed considerationof their cross examination and non-availability of documentaryevidence to prove that survey was conducted, the High Court shouldnot have interfered with such factual findings by taking intoconsideration the oral evidence of witnesses - The crucial fact thatthe survey was not conducted had attained finality by the earlierjudgement of the High Court - Therefore, once trial court and firstappellate court which are the fact finding courts have come to thespecific conclusion that the plaintiff is entitled for specific performance of the agreement of sale, the High Court on re-appreciation of evidence could not have upset the factual findingsin second appeal - Specific Relief Act, 1963.Specific Relief Act, 1963:Escalation of prices cannot be a ground for denying the reliefof specific performance - Specific performance is an equitable reliefand granting the relief is the discretion of the court - The discretionhas to be exercised by the court judicially and within the settledprinciples of law - Equity.s.l 6(c) - Essential ingredients - Proof of readiness andwillingness to perform - In a suit for specific performance, burdenis always on the plaintiff to aver and prove that they are alwaysready and willing to perform their part of the contract throughout -s.16(c) of the Act mandates that not only there be a plea of readinessand willingness but it also has to be proved by acceptable evidence- Requirement ofulfi!ling the conditions under s. l 6(c) of the Act, is a condition precedent for obtaining the relief of specificperformance. |
Judge | Honble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana |
Neutral Citation | 2017 INSC 790 |
Petitioner | Ramathal |
Respondent | Maruthathal & Ors. |
SCR | [2017] 8 S.C.R. 613 |
Judgement Date | 2017-08-22 |
Case Number | 10741 |
National Digital Library of India (NDLI) is a virtual repository of learning resources which is not just a repository with search/browse facilities but provides a host of services for the learner community. It is sponsored and mentored by Ministry of Education, Government of India, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT). Filtered and federated searching is employed to facilitate focused searching so that learners can find the right resource with least effort and in minimum time. NDLI provides user group-specific services such as Examination Preparatory for School and College students and job aspirants. Services for Researchers and general learners are also provided. NDLI is designed to hold content of any language and provides interface support for 10 most widely used Indian languages. It is built to provide support for all academic levels including researchers and life-long learners, all disciplines, all popular forms of access devices and differently-abled learners. It is designed to enable people to learn and prepare from best practices from all over the world and to facilitate researchers to perform inter-linked exploration from multiple sources. It is developed, operated and maintained from Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.
Learn more about this project from here.
NDLI is a conglomeration of freely available or institutionally contributed or donated or publisher managed contents. Almost all these contents are hosted and accessed from respective sources. The responsibility for authenticity, relevance, completeness, accuracy, reliability and suitability of these contents rests with the respective organization and NDLI has no responsibility or liability for these. Every effort is made to keep the NDLI portal up and running smoothly unless there are some unavoidable technical issues.
Ministry of Education, through its National Mission on Education through Information and Communication Technology (NMEICT), has sponsored and funded the National Digital Library of India (NDLI) project.
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 |