In Brief
The appellants purchased a vacant 2,400 sq. ft. plot under a sale agreement requiring the respondent-owner to provide vacant possession. When the respondent refused to execute the sale deed, the court decreed specific performance. The appellants deposited the balance payment, but the respondent still refused. The court-appointed officer executed the sale deed. However, when the appellants sought possession through execution proceedings, the High Court dismissed the execution petition, holding that possession must be separately decreed. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, ruling that relief of possession is inherent in a decree for specific performance and need not be separately claimed. Section 22(2) of the Specific Relief Act is directory, not mandatory, and the decree-holders are entitled to physical possession under the executed sale deed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.