In Brief
A plaintiff seeking specific performance of an agreement to sell a residential property failed to establish his continuous readiness and willingness to perform his contractual obligations (payment of Rs. 30,000). The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of the suit, holding that Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 mandatorily requires the plaintiff to aver and prove such readiness and willingness as a substantive threshold condition. Examining the entire pleadings and evidence, the Court found no assertion by the plaintiff that he had performed or remained ready and willing to perform his part. A belated application to amend the plaint at the appellate stage was rightly rejected. The Court also clarified that the High Court correctly refused to hear the second appeal on questions not formally formulated at admission.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.