Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Monday, 21 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2017-04-13 allowed

Patel Kantilal Parshottamdas (D) & Ors vs Jitendrakumar Nanjibhai Mistry (D) through Lrs & Ors

Bench: 2 — A.K. Sikri

In Brief

A lessee of a 99-year leasehold property executed an Agreement to Sell to a buyer who paid earnest money. The sale deed was never executed within the extended time limits. The lessee sued for cancellation and possession; the buyer sued for specific performance. The trial court dismissed the buyer's suit and decreed the lessee's claims. On appeal, the High Court set aside the lessee's decree and remanded the case, introducing sua sponte the novel ground that the agreement was a contingent contract unenforceable against a non-owner. The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred by raising a new legal basis not pleaded by any party and directing amendment. The Court allowed the appeal and remitted to the High Court to decide only the possession issue.

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

Specific Relief Transfer of Property Contracts Lessee's Rights Specific Performance Contingent Contracts Cancellation of Agreement

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