Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Sunday, 20 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2017-12-05 partly_allowed

Revanasiddayya vs Gangamma @ Shashikala & Anr

Bench: 2 — Abhay Manohar Sapre

In Brief

A man entered an agreement in 1986 to purchase agricultural land, paid earnest money, and was given possession. After the seller died, his heirs sued for return of the land. The buyer later sued for specific performance but lost. The heirs' suit for possession succeeded in the High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the judgment, holding that loss of the specific performance suit made the buyer's possession illegal. However, invoking Article 142, the Court ordered the heirs to refund the earnest money while the buyer restore possession within three months, ensuring complete justice between the long-disputed parties.

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

Property Law Transfer of Property Act Specific Performance Possession Succession Earnest Money Article 142 Powers

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