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 2016-01-21 allowed

Satish Kumar vs Karan Singh & Anr

Bench: 2 — M.Y. Eqbal

In Brief

Satish Kumar sought specific performance of an agreement to purchase a Delhi Development Authority (DDA) plot from Karan Singh for Rs. 4.6 lakh, dated 6 January 1995. Both the trial court and High Court decreed specific performance. However, the Supreme Court reversed both orders, holding that specific performance cannot be granted where the underlying contract is defective or unenforceable. The Court noted that the DDA had made the plot non-transferable for ten years—a material defect that rendered the contract unenforceable. The Court emphasised that judges possess discretion to grant specific performance only when a valid, enforceable contract exists; absent such a contract, courts cannot create one for the parties.

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

Specific Performance Contract Law Specific Relief Act, 1963 Real Property Discretionary Jurisdiction

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