NDLI: Atma Ram Vs. Charanjit Singh

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	r.17 Code of Civil Procedure s.149 Or. VI
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Specific Relief Act, 1963 (47 of 1963) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908)
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2
Case Type	Special Leave Petition
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Petition Dismissed
Headnote	Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.149; Or. VI, r.17 – Respondent agreed to sell immovable property to petitioner under an agreement entered in 1994 – Earnest money was paid – Petitioner issued legal notice in 1996 claiming that when the date fixed for specific performance (07.10.96) arrived, the respondent disclosed about the pendency of some civil litigation with a third party, as an impediment for execution of sale deed – Petitioner filed suit in 1999 for mandatory injunction – Respondent sought its dismissal on the ground that said suit was not maintainable for enforcing specific performance of an agreement of sale – Trial Court directed the petitioner to pay requisite court fee to overcome said technical objection – Petitioner paid deficit court fee – Trial court decreed the suit – Upset by First Appellate Court – Confirmed by High Court – Held: If the suit was actually one for specific performance, the petitioner ought to have at least valued the suit on the basis of sale consideration mentioned in the agreement – But he did not – If the suit was only for mandatory injunction (which it actually was), only recourse open to the petitioner was to seek an amendment u/Or. VI, r.17 – If such an application had been filed, it would have either been dismissed on limitation or even if allowed, the prayer for specific performance, inserted by amendment, would not have been, as a matter of course, taken as relating back to the date of the plaint – Thus, a short-cut was found by the petitioner to retain the plaint as such, but to seek permission to pay deficit court fee, as though what was filed in the first instance was actually a suit for specific performance – Such dubious approach should not be allowed especially in a suit for specific performance, as the relief of specific performance is discretionary u/s.20, 1963 Act – Trial Court, by a convoluted logic, chose to treat the suit as one for specific performance and permitted the petitioner to pay deficit court fee – High Court’s approach in non suiting the petitioner on ground of limitation, despite the original defect having been cured and the same having attained finality, may be faulty – But the petitioner should not be allowed to take its advantage by taking shelter u/ s.149 especially when he filed the suit (after more than three years of the date fixed under the agreement) only as one for mandatory injunction, valued the same as such and paid court fee accordingly, but chose to pay proper court fee after being confronted with an application for the dismissal of the suit – First Appellate Court rightly reversed the decree of specific performance granted by Trial Court – High Court right in upholding the same – Specific Relief Act, 1963 – ss.16(c), 20
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice V. Ramasubramanian
Neutral Citation	2020 INSC 162
Petitioner	Atma Ram
Respondent	Charanjit Singh
SCR	[2020] 3 S.C.R. 697
Judgement Date	2020-02-10
Case Number	27598

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

Atma Ram Vs. Charanjit Singh

Please Log-in to view this content

Gayathri Vs. M. Girish

Resham Singh Pyara Singh Vs. Abdul Sattar

Gurbachan Singh Vs. Bhag Singh and Ors.

State of Haryana Vs. Darshana Devi & Ors.

Bhoop Singh Vs. Ram Singh Major and Ors.

Ashok Kumar Mittal Vs. Ram Kumar Gupta & Anr.

M/s. S.b. Minerals Vs. M/s. Mspl Limited

Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid, Varanasi Vs. Rakhi Singh and Others

Shri Ram Prakash Vs. Smt. Charan Kaur and Anr.

Atma Ram Vs. Charanjit Singh

Atma Ram Vs. Charanjit Singh

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Gayathri Vs. M. Girish

Resham Singh Pyara Singh Vs. Abdul Sattar

Gurbachan Singh Vs. Bhag Singh and Ors.

State of Haryana Vs. Darshana Devi & Ors.

Bhoop Singh Vs. Ram Singh Major and Ors.

Ashok Kumar Mittal Vs. Ram Kumar Gupta & Anr.

M/s. S.b. Minerals Vs. M/s. Mspl Limited

Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid, Varanasi Vs. Rakhi Singh and Others

Shri Ram Prakash Vs. Smt. Charan Kaur and Anr.

Atma Ram Vs. Charanjit Singh