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 2017-03-21 allowed

Vasanthi vs Venugopal (D) Thr. L.Rs

Bench: 2 — Amitava Roy

In Brief

A widow purchased a property through a registered sale deed in 1982 from its owners for Rs. 35,000. The original property owner had earlier entered into an agreement for sale with another person (Venugopal) in 1975, who occupied the property and paid a portion of the sale price. When Venugopal refused to acknowledge the widow as landlord or pay enhanced rent, she sought his eviction and a declaration of her title. Venugopal claimed protection under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act based on part performance of his 1975 agreement. The Supreme Court held that while Section 53A can protect a person in possession under a contract, it requires proof of constant readiness and willingness to perform the contract. Since Venugopal never sued for specific performance and provided inadequate evidence of his willingness, and since the widow was a bona fide purchaser without notice of the earlier agreement, she was entitled to her declaration of title and possession.

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

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