A.R. Madana Gopal Etc. vs. M/S Ramnath Publications Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. [Civil Appeal Nos.3523-3526 of 2010]
Suit for specific performance cannot be dismissed on the sole ground of delay or laches
Brief: In the said appeal, the Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed the specific performance of agreements for sale of immovable property and held that a suit for specific performance cannot be dismissed on the sole ground of delay or laches unless it related to immovable property where time was of essence. The Court further held that escalation of prices cannot be the sole ground to deny specific performance.
RELEVANT PARAGRAPH
14. A suit for specific performance cannot be
dismissed on the sole ground of delay or laches. However, an exception to this
rule is where an immovable property is to be sold within a certain period, time
being of the essence, and it is not found that owing to some default on the
part of the plaintiff, the sale could not take place within the stipulated
time. Once a suit for specific performance has been filed, any delay as a
result of the Court process cannot be put against the plaintiff as a matter of
law in decreeing specific performance. However, it is within the discretion of
the Court, regard being had to the facts of each case, as to whether some
additional amount ought or ought not to be paid by the plaintiff once a decree
of specific performance is passed in its favour even at the appellate stage. We
are in agreement with the Appellants that they did not file the civil suits
immediately after the disposal of the Writ Petition in 1998 due to the pendency
of Writ Appeals. Escalation of prices cannot be the sole ground to deny
specific performance. We are of the considered view that the Respondents are
not entitled for any additional amount as 90 per cent of the sale consideration
was paid by the Appellants before 1994. It is not necessary for us to deal with
the submission of the Appellants regarding the applicability of the amendment
to the Specific Relief Act, 1963, in view of the conclusion that we have
reached in favour of the Appellants.