In Brief
Govindappa sought specific performance of an agreement to sell land made with Bale Venkataramanappa, who had received a 15-year alienation restriction on the property. The agreement was executed in 1990, during the restriction period (which ended in 1988). The Supreme Court held that agreements violating statutory alienation restrictions are void and unenforceable during the restricted period. Applying the doctrine ex turpi causa non oritur actio (no action arises from unlawful conduct), the Court held that when both parties are equally culpable in breaching such restrictions, the Court will not grant relief through specific performance, as doing so would actively assist in enforcing an illegal agreement contrary to public policy. The Court dismissed the suit and upheld the trial court's order.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.