In Brief
The plaintiff sought specific performance of a property sale agreement dated 18 January 1983 for Rs.46,000 against the original seller and five defendants. The seller had instead sold the property to defendant No. 6 on 9 February 1983 for Rs.45,000, claiming a prior agreement existed. The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' finding that the earlier agreement with defendant No. 6 was bogus and created to avoid the plaintiff's genuine agreement. The Court decreed specific performance, directing the sellers to execute the sale deed to the plaintiff and defendant No. 6 to join in conveying the title, while the sellers must refund Rs.45,000 to defendant No. 6 under Section 65 of the Contract Act."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.