In Brief
The respondent sought specific performance of a property sale agreement dated June 1999 with agreed consideration of Rs. 1.60 lakhs. Three courts concurrently decreed specific performance, finding the agreement was not merely a security for a loan. The Supreme Court upheld the factual findings but held that the discretion to award specific performance must be exercised equitably. As the respondent's father was a moneylender and the property's actual value (Rs. 6.30 lakhs) vastly exceeded the agreed price, giving the respondent unfair advantage, specific performance was inequitable. The Court set aside the decree and instead ordered the appellants to pay Rs. 15 lakhs as compensation in lieu of specific performance.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.