Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Thursday, 30 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2025-05-02 dismissed

K.R. SURESH vs R. POORNIMA & ORS

Bench: 2 — J.B. Pardiwala, R. Mahadevan

In Brief

The appellant purchased a property under an Agreement of Sale (ATS) dated 25.07.2007, paying Rs. 20,00,000/- as 'advance money' towards the total sale consideration of Rs. 55,50,000/-. The agreement required payment of the balance amount within four months. The appellant failed to pay within the stipulated period, and the sellers forfeited the advance money and sold the property to third parties. The appellant sued for specific performance. The trial court and High Court dismissed the suit, holding that the appellant failed to prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract and was not entitled to refund of the advance money as no specific prayer was made under Section 22 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, holding that the advance money constituted earnest money and was rightfully forfeited. The Court clarified that while plaints can be amended at any stage to seek alternative relief including refund of earnest money, courts cannot grant such relief suo moto; it must be specifically claimed.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Specific Performance Contract Law Earnest Money Forfeiture Agreement of Sale Immovable Property Damages and Penalties Remedies and Reliefs Pleadings and Procedure

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login