•

/---
, ex--

/ •.; N~ . . St.:~'J,;, ~w i
\
,
'T'A t ""SPECIFIC<JlELI£F
,, :, : ' ,,'~' :/;':;:;\ <:: :;;,;:,~',"'~':; ::;;;; ' ,- '.'
ACT ' !e n l
~Ia

~a\
:(LEGAL -REMEDIES) L
tPo r!(
I
l'
lEP.
-
-
I
I '

"

"
!

5j'

, . " A J UR;IST

"

By
. '." ,,: '

c, VEENA : B.Con,,, LL. B.

Ad voc",t e, H igh Cou rt, . Uo mbay

" ,,'

.
"
"

• • ":0..
: .. f- " ~

c. JAMNADAS & co .:
ED uCATIONAL 8< LAW PUBU SHE.' lS
'"
14 6-C, Shamalda s Gandh i Marg;
BOMB AY - 400 ,0 02

"
.:- .
 - - -
~ .:- -'
-.. ,
: i.

"·'L·
',:'O!,
. >.~ ~
"i;. ...
~,~

".

~ '. & EDITED SEVENTH EDiTION

,.
•
,~ . those 'of translations reserVed by the Publishers}

., '
".
•
.- o .,:

'. ','
,~..

ff""
--- Price Rs, 40~ OO

".
;. '

,, '

.~ .. '

/.L::/';;: /"
, .'.
,Cc;
Printed by -;
. .~\ 'J : i •
. . ,"
~n, P~iiJ4t ' S.
. - .
' Shah • B. Com. . ACt\. .
, . , ' y', ..
! ~ : : At :~:Premlum Oat.) Products' Priva~e limited,
L ': t ·~' ;
.: ';
Parlj a. t Printery : Compound, .~ ... :.: •
';
(i ' • zaS/l, RANIP, : ' 3t12!1S0" Djst, ;' ,.. hmc"'''ad
;'1«
.t ' .•:

...... '.,'. ;.
;j. :, ...
,
i
;':
\ ...,;
,j , . .
I 't
"

,.
~-i

",

"

':~";~:~;-'~'~:~~~~r:~~~~'I£~l0'<~~~
 ~....-~-,--:-:--,-------- , - -" , .- - .
:.
. ~"

!. "" ..
. ~\iPREFACE TO , THE <, ' SEVENTH ' ~i~DITION .
' ~
Is a matt~~" of great plea~ur'dor us Ito place before':4;~ ',stude'n'ts tne seven~
. ..
: I=..~;i;:;.;edl[tlon Of':ouf'li'ook 'bn 'Sp'eclflc Relief A'c thn thls"edltlo'n, Important recent 'caSAl-law'
well as" th~" latest : q~e$t1cin ' papers of'tbe BombayUnlversliy' exa-mrna'irolu, "have '
-'heen Incorporated: We trust thai this ,revised edition will adequately meet th.e needs
of all law 's tudents,
PUBLISHERS ,

f .~
1

!'
.'

CONTENTS
Section
Introduction
PART I PREUMINARY
1. Short title, extent and commencement 4 ·. .
2. Definitions . 4 .· .
3. Savings 7
. 4. Specific rellel to be yranted only for e,n forcing Individual c:ivil rights and n"at.Jor '. :~:.
enforcing penal laws 7."." . ',-
PART II . SPEaRe REUEF- ,~- ~

CHAPTER I Recovering Pone.sslon of Property J~~

5. ,Recovery of specific 1.l'!'rriovable property
6. Suit by person dispossessed -~f Jmmovable property
. .1 . .Recovery of speclfi~ ·~ovable. , pr~p~rty
8. Liability of person In pos;sesslon, not as owner to deliver to persons entitled to ~,
Immediate possession 15
CHAPTER II Specific Performance of Contracts
'- ,
9. Defences respecting suits for relief based on contract 18
10. C.ues In which speclClc performance of contrad , enforceable 18
"
11. <;:ases In which specific perf·. Jrmance of contracts connected with tNst e'nforceable 22.

'l
' f'.
12. Sp:.eclllc performance of part or contr~ct
13. Rights of purchaser or lessee agal~st, person wHh no title' ~r Imperfect tipe
14. Contracts not specifically enforcellble
23
26
29:.'

'- '

.
 I
15.", Wfl~ " ' ~ay' ,obta"{n specific performance 34
,,:':
16: .!'er,onal birs ' to relief
.. ':.'J ." ,.' : , . , ,,'
35
,.
"
"~~ 7 ~ 9?,nt.r~~·,t:~ ..~o .,' ~~I! . or let
'; ...~::~nL?..r.-ff~;~ t~·l.~; J,.
property by one who has no . title, not specifically
37
·.1 .8.~t.l~9~f~rfQrce,"1,er:tt . except with variation 38
~ 9; ,~ellef against parties and persons claiming under them subsequent title 40
~O ...DJs:cr,et ,lo~ as ·to decreeing specific p erfo rmance 42
, ,"
21. 'Power to' award compensation In certain cases 47 prima ry r
,'. ?2. Power to grant relief for possession, partition, refund of earnest money, etc, 49 example-s' e tr!"'-.' ~
of a prime -. '. 4
2.3·: -i~iq~idatio·n ~i ' damages not a bar to specific pe~rormace 49
.. , ' ;.,:,!'.:' ,'" . '~. -, . . right. The :!
;" 24 :.. 8ar . of ' suit . for ~ breach - after dismissal. of suit for .specific performance 50
.... ." pro tect ion .
.~, : 2S;:: ApplJcotion of preceding sections to . certaln awards and test; menta;y directions : ",dlon

f:'; ·C\i~ ·~~~.~t~ .~~t,l~m~::OJ>TER III

51
The (
follOWing ...
R..!cUrlc:aUon of · lru.trumenls (i) R,
F~h~~· I~st~~m ..nt may 6'e rectifl,£ 53 (iOSI
~T :>~~.:.-~ :- . CHAPTER IV Rescission of Contracts
(iii) R,
.'
}:.: 27. ,When rescission may be .adjudged or refused 57 (iv) R.

~;:;;;. 28. ~:.!~~~t . I;:;:;~~ t~;c~;:~~f~;~e~f~r:~~~ect:f f:hlt~: ~::. bO:e~e~::r::d 59

(v) C,
(v i) Of
'~~ .. 29 ;~' Alfer~atJve' prayer for rescission In su it for speci fic performance 60
(vii) In)
t : 30. Court may require parties rescinding to do equ ity 60
~;
J , .'
'. CHAPTER V Cancellati o n of Instruments
As Po
~ - ' -
""" .. :". 3 1. Wh en cancellation may b e order ed 61
red ress b I

arran ged ~ 4 .
;,;(.'. 32 . Wh~ t Instruments may be' p ilTtlally cancelled 64 itself pillei'>
~;!" : S3. ·Power to require benefit to be restored or compensation to be made when Ttlere i ~ -: .-
.
¥~;~~." '~ Instrum ent )s ' cancelled or is successrully res isted as being void or voidab le 64 India. Th ;' -'.-..
of the IClW;',· ~
~A;~;:.:
~,..,. ' ..•. '
\· :~.". .
CHAPTER VI . .
DeclaralCiry Decrees
~r~ -~·:34. Discretion or Court as to decJaration of status or r ight 67 '
The G
;, ;,> 3S;:,Effect of decl.rqtJon 73
Kings; no c

l~i;~}~~8', CHAPrr:~; IIIlnj~=ti:~~~::ra:~~erperual due to the

. " system "Ja !
iT;'~:~3~t{~~'~~~~Uye T.'!lief h9W grant ed 74 form of a ,.
Common L
;t~.j< ;37.;~Te~porery : a~d perpetuel Injunctions 74
tL··(V' ,'. , '. CHAPTER VIII Perpetual InjuncUons
1. n.
ri' '.~" " ' ~'::i. ··"· in -.
\"~..:.:, 38..!J?erp.~tual Injunction when granted 76 me
-., :·:i9i~M';~d~to;;' Injunctions ' 80 2. Th •
~:: '." "<:~' ~':";': " '-:;-..: '
;';1 ··.4 0;-:J)amage.s; In' .lJeu of, .or In addition to , injunction 82 · rc'n
~~I " :~4'lf'i~j~-;;~'t'i~~~~I\;)~e~ re·rused · 82 Cal

. 42r~~Junctlo~ t~ perforin negative agre e·ment" . cor.

'! ' • 43': )\mendment of 'A,!dt' 10 o"f 1940 SR-1
87
" " ;

-,

.'
'-

,.

j
 ..
~~

,: "', '.,. ,.' ~"')::" ::"\\1::~3:" , 1~:f!: i<,} ': ~:,:,. :" " ;~;:
, : . . ... ' " .,IN"T;RQDUCTIPJ>!" , ,;~ '':'V ' "" , .'
.- r ~-:¥i~T~'ei S·petif.ic~ Reli~fr~dt~~rl4V~~~~f~~;~c~~~~1~~l~W1~:'~~)i"~t~~~·~·~· ~f
t' ". '.

-. ,.187'7;·>The "amendments' anVchaijg·es:·'br6ughUllbobl1<tiY.:,<tneilAcpof, 19.63

' ·w1it' bli.ka 'on; ih~ : recGmni~riiliiI6n :of ,th.:Litw· Co'lnmH.r6ii~ ' '' !'·: ,,:
. .: .. .. . ' .. ";-', . -f,-: ' '. ' . , "i "
.
, '-;" '·;'i.~·~·> ; ":,. , ... ~: .. ..;~ ~ • ..".,: .. . .
Specific rollef means ' relief In' speele, The obJeclof :'the"Speclflc.·R-elief lB. U;. " me.tns
"Act 'is : confined to that class' :o( rem~dies by wh'i~h i'a -suitor 'seek:s to' ~btaln Bomb4Y Univer-
" lInd "a -Couft ' or Justice'; seeks: to 'give him "the '·very 'reilef to ':Whlch · he 'is sity/
entitled: "," ' . ' ' ,
Leg'al . ~ . ~,~' H. tegal · rem~die$1 in Civirt.a:W, ..;an"b-e eith~~r" f~L t~e p~rp~o~'<~f enfo.:....:c;;ln.:;9'-·_ _
~ f1mary-". , 47 ~ primary rights or for the purpos.e of enforcing sanctioning rights. Ft:'r
.J amp~t"S t etc .._1? · :t
·example-sp,ecl(l~p~~for~ance of'a c?":tract Is In the n~tu~~ of enforcement
-r a prima~ ~ . 49 '#~ of a(Ilafmary right) while ~ard of damaggs is In the~a~ure Of. a " s~ning.J
~ pht, The ... 50 right: he central probtcm of the SpecHi~ ~elieE. Act is t~e enforcement or
o tection ' protection of primary rlghts.-
, The_ drectlo";l The ~ifferent kinds of specific relief dealt with by the " Act are the
(
lowing :: follOWing:
t- (i).He: (i) R~r-y of possession of proper~y-immovable and rpov~ble.
' ,' 53
J
l,,
~ (1.[; (iI) Specific performance of contracts,
(iii) Re (iiI) Rectification of documepts which have errors In them.
!(
( Iv), Re
(v) Ca
57
(iv) Rescission of contracts which are voidable, ~
(v) Cancellation of instruments ~hich are not v~lid.
59
1Mpe: (vi) Declaratory decree.").
\ "(vii) ~~jl ,60
(vii) Injunctions by way of preventive relief.
As Pollock and Mulla observed "SpecifiC relief, as a form of judicial

~ \ 5 -:
1'., ;::;f~' ­
re~~trb t redress, belongs to the law of proccd l; re and in a body of written law
n?~d a, -
61 ' arranged according to the natmal affinH! ~.'5 of the $ubJcct rnatter, would . find 4

,If' lC 64 Itself placed as a dlstlnc-t part or 'other division of ' Civil Procedure Code",
?re \ al "There Is an Impor~ant historiC reason as to why this has n9t happe"ned in
A _t.~ a.ll~ _ 64 India. The reason is that the Specific Relief Act is more or less a reflection :.'
-- ,ihc 'law' .· "o f ~t~c law regard ing specific· relief in Engl~nd ~

~ ~ ~~e Co - 67 . THE LAW Of §PIOCIFIC RELIEF IN ENGLAND

The Co~~on 'Law in ' Engl~nd: ':~i~v~lop~d' fro~ the times of the Norman
'\ .. d 73
'<,\no d - King . .. /10 doubt developed a general law of the Realm, ·But ,at the same time,

"tt C
:
1
.
due to the technicality of the procedure, it bccall!e rigid : The procedure of writ
.' system was responsible for the rigidity of Common Law. Unless th'ere ~as a
74 ~orm of a writ available, no relief could be claimed by a litigant in a Court of
74 Common Law. This resulted in the follOWing defects" :
1. There were certain rights which did not have corresponding remedies
.-1 ( in Co mmon Law, if such rights were infringed. c .g. , the rights of a
76
mortgagor or the rights of a benefiCiary in the case of a trust.
80
82
2, Though certain other rIghts had remedi" I'n Common Law, the
re'me d ics were inadequate." For example, under Common Law, there
82 c(\u ld - only be a suit for damages in the: case of a breach " of
: 83 contract; neither specific performance of a contract ~or an inju nction
87 SR- 1
87

,
<r -,

\,
 2 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

to prevent a breach ~f con~~act could ' be given,

. f*~:': ·; . . : .;~'
3. T~e Common Law Courts " could not give certain auxiliary help. to·¥. : ....
the litigants, for example, if the presence of a witness was necessary :
I'

in the Courts, the Common La~ Courts could ' not compe{ his
I
: presence", I
. ,.:,~ . '.These defects of Common Law arising out of the rigidities of the 1
;, ~ ~;~ proc~dure were corrected by the Courts of Equity. [n England the King Is
supposed to be the Fountain of _Justice. As the rigidity of the writ procedure
I
i/r
dev:e~ped in the .C ourts of Common Law. iJ.ggrieved pe(-sons would approach
the Lorq ·.Chan~el!or who ~as . in a sense. the representative "of the Crowl1
In' '~~~eq ' o.f . ad..;.un~stration of Justice. Thus, .the Courts of Chancery developed:,
. The Comm,)n Law C~urts would ge"nerally grant damages, if there w~s ,
Infringement ' of a' civil right, but they would not enf9rce the rlg·h t · ltself in .;
' species, e .g., If there was a 'contract for sale of ,Immovable property and '.
the .promisor-seller would not p'erfom his part of the contract, the aggrieved
buyer ' could' only claim damages in a ' Court of 'Common Law; he could
~ever compel the premisor to sell the land. H9wever, 'the Courts of Equity
: .' began to enforce thu(: specific reliefs. All the reliefs prOVided for in the I
I
' Speclfic Reller Act a r<:! the reliefs developed by Courts of Equity in England .
The folloWing w.ere the criteria for grant ~f specific relief under English Law ,.
4-
., Ii
f
1.. Equity acts In personam ,
,.2. The Courts of Equity are the Courts' of Conscienc-:e, ,I
f .,.3. The Courts of Equity would grant relief only when the re liefs under
,i
Common Law were' inadequate . . (I
These p;inciples a re ; to a · large ex tent renected In the Specific Relief !
Act. .Iris,::.":..._--:----:--~
.~~iurp of spccib'c celfc(.JSpecifiC rdid is 'r elief j~ sp~cie, It Is remedy I
which , .
, . aims at ·the ,exact fulfilment of an obligation. As can be see n from
'

. the a,bp've ' description the ,jurisdi.ction to grant specific relief was exercised
by the" Cou,"t of Equity in England. The Cour.~s ,of Equity were the courts of
•~-- ;>
. ...... ...
I
. .'-

Wr~~~., 5h,~rt noi.

conscience.
Therefore', specific relief was not granted ' In ' a me~hanlc'al way. SpecifiC ,.. I
on : Speafic r.DeI ~ wo'uld be the result of judicial descretlon based on several factors,
S.U. Jun. 77; ' S~c. h , . ' a -d escretlon was genera II y gul d e d . by' •the o
/s djs",.tJon.ry. f II oWing
. maxims 0 f I
~~
t·.
_
Jon. 79
Nov. 80
. ,Apr. ,82'.
e.quity ·,
, ~He who ~omes to equity mus~ come· with clean . hands.
The ' person may be disentitled to specific relief if his past
I
~ " O~t. :::.. conduct pertaining to the matter In !i'tlgation was not clean . If he
~ Mar:. .was g~ilty of any unfa'irness , he w~uld be disentitled to get specific
;.:.' " " "" \ .. relief, ' , ...,

L ,.,. 'W'l{~ 4 sholt ndjf :" .~ @1~ who wan'ts equity must do .equity. •
.~ ( on .-: G'ilnling of
. sp~~/fJc !.II~I :Is " , Is maxim 0 f equity impose d certain equlta
Th . bl e Olga
bl' l'IOns on
.ciscl'eliofl-a'1}/. '>.- the plaintiff, If he wanted rell'e f in a Court of Equit~'1 for e.g,. if a
.~ ,l, o •• ····. s .U. 0 ct. 89 " p'er:son
. had . pledged certain' movable articles against a loan. After
.,~ " '{{L; ·.Apr. 92 the debt was barred by limitation. the cr~dltor may not be able to
" ,;
,, ~ . ', .. ' .-~ ~'. I;

"'.--,0..---------- ..,....- ..
.... _, C' ..

,~
t:'.: ... _

,- ~
 .I
, .\ .
, :. ; -:',(NTROO UCTION 3
~ ~"': "'r' " • '; ...
~ r' r> ;~~',sue the ~ebt?r~ln 'a i·p~~r~ . ~.ut; ij:the ~~b~or;" ~~~, :'l c~aim pOS~.'7sl0~· i.':'
.' . I ,: of . the<movaol.,.. : Ortille. '.'p ledged ; he had 'to ·repay the loan even ."':

" . tnough. It was :ti~e-bat:t~d. ', .', '; ' (, ';,:..;',. . . .

. . . . .... ~ \ .• ,- .. ... . , . ".,!
(3); Oeiay defeats equity: '; .
• • :': " . ' . ' - . f ,

.. The principle In eqully was that eqully helped the vigilant and
.n.et
, p o: the ilidolent. "Therefore, Irre.spective ' of ' the ' Law' of Umitatton,
. the plaintiff In a Cou~ oJ Equity had to , be VigIlant and ha~ to act
promptly, It will be seen liter that these cardinal prinCiples of
equity 'In
England gUIde to a large extent, the grant of specific '
relieL

.~
!
I
I,
!

I.

:r. . ,
I
. - I
-- : _. -

1
'J

r
\
I
I,'j
I " \

t. -' .{. i .
,.
I

.:: J,
i\ -.
!
.- 'I '
:; '
!,
, , . '; -
". !

a
; ,'
r
I
'.
"' ; .:'l.\'
'I

: 4, ; :- - -,- - .

I, " .~
 THE
..
SPECIFIC RELIEF
" -' : . ACT, 1963 , ;. ~ ' -.

(No. 47 of 1963)
",,;.
"An Act . to define and amend the law relating to certain
~ ,.' . kinds of Specific Relief

BE it enacted by Parliam en t in the Fourteenth Year of the

Republic of India as follows :-

PART - I
PRELIMINARY .:

y. !jhort tiNe, extent and commencement,-

!
'", .

(I) This Act may be called th e SpeCific Relief Act, 1963.

(Ii) It extends to the whole of India except the State of.
Jammu and Kashm ir.
(iiI) It shall come into force on such date as the Central
. . Government may, by ' notification in the Offi'cial Gazet te,
appoint.

t ..~~
::: (,"2
.'t~.
':11 ,1
The' Specific Relief A~t of 1963 was en'acted to substitute the l!arlicr
,Act of 1877. f ,
~
~
:;' ~~. ~J:~
,1"', .
~he .Act extends to the whole o f India except the State of Jammu and
·~a5hm l r . It came into effect. on 1st March 1964 . I
i
~ ' ~ ·M· . "" ':: The Specific Relief Act applics to Sikkim. (Durga Prasad v. Paldem ;

,t ~""":": '" .. ;~, t...m., AIR (1981) Sikl'im 41 .as cited in Pollock and Mull. The Indian
I,,
~ < ie :,ij(. ...:. yontract & Specific Relief Acts, 10th edn.- p. 941)

f.,.)t:t .' 4·. : ~~:C;~::~~s.- In this Act, unless the context otherwise
"T"'

,.I : '.~_,.:;" ':'.:" (a) "obligation" Includes ever@ enforceable by law;

f· .. ...... . ': (b) "settlement" means an Instrument (oth er than a ·will or
: .<~ ) :,. ,~.~ oJ:~odli:il as defined by the ' Indian Succession Act, 1925)
, . v..iIA;,ll. ~.'ilJc ~ · d:iid whereby the destinatio n or ' devolution of' successive
i.
..
~ ~' :- ~h ": .' ':1::0~ V., Interests In movable or immovable prop erty is disposed
",,/Is "$ ort not. ,..: ~ _,./" _ . . .
. on : : S.lIlomont. · ,~ of or Is ' agreed to be disposed of; . .
S.U. Mar; 86...tv (c) ! "trust" has the same meaning . as in' Saction 3 of tile
Apr. 88 . -:. I ~ .
. "" Apr.; 92:.I(..A.. Indian Trusts Act, 1882, and includes an obligation in
.. ,, ~ .
r
!. , -.
...
~ ,

.,
" .,

j' .J •.~
..JI\ '. ='I ·\,;,.
- l ';~ : .r )~REUMINf.RY
,'[ .. . ,'. ."1'
,
.. S
I - "

I , ,;.{.!: 'W;'{:'ti:l.~! .f!g,t~r'~J?:(!;a "ti BS(,. ~lth in, th~ /neanlng , 0J·Chapt er.,IX.
':',.·:'~) r~.:rll~i"n\(ibf (Jhah!Act; 'A ...~')im!}:,·:·!. ·,:I . o~:~~:: ~I1.".;!; :, .1; . "~)/IJ . ,:'!; \,;~ ..': ~:·J·q·.' ;l~ ·: .

,;~.d t,:iili~~tYtl$iie;" ';!lri~f&;ciJ~, :;ai~r~ ' p'eE~h !'!idldli;~ i ;p~ope~;tt:d)n

.~ , •
. ~ •• ;", ~ '.' .~. '. •
. ".;' :~" I~:; ::I.';. :. ~. ,- : '\> ... :.':~
~:.;.I :': ~~~?:'I:}rtth~t'i·f~~.r,!~. ~~c.. ~'1~~~~::\~!d,_: I~ : .:~
Co "

.",. (el .all.:other . words and expressions used herein, but not
... • .1. ... · 0 .... ' .• ' 'defined, and defined ' In the Indian Contract' Act, 1872,

.. ",. 'have thi! , 'mIlanlrig's " respectively ~sslgne(r to them In

",' ,.. that Act. ' ...:." ' '
OBLIGATiON
' The word 'obligatlon' suggests a tie or a bond oetween persons In law.
, Generally, it -Is a right of any person against another person in respect of
l'roP~lty. -It i-s in a .:sense a. proprl~t6ry ·right in per.sonam~ Under this
sGction, an obligation " includes eyeQI d"twenforce,able at low: Therefore,
·moral, -Jici-al -and ·religioos " dulies 'which -are 'not -enforceable ·In "law Clre
excluded from the definition of.oqligation. Generally, obligation in law may
be of one ,of the (ollowing forms :
I.i Obligation .rlslng. out of tort. ~
(b) Obli~.tion arising out of contract. - -

I
,
I

i
'
Ie) Obligotion arising under a law or a statute.
(di Obligation arising out of quasi-contract.
(e) Obligation arising out of trust.
-
I . '" ' Wn'te 11 short ,fO(;
TRUST
on" ~ Trust,
I Trust" has been defined in Sec " 3 of the Ind ian Trusts Act, 1882, as 'HI. Ilpr. 85
follows " Apr, 89
A TR IJ.s.T t A trust is . ar.') obligation. annexed to the ownership of the pr,operty Oc t. 91
\, ~
ari31ng out of a '"'t"onfldcnce_ reposed In, and a~ ce pted by, the owner, or M.y · 94
.,

;'°..1
declared and accepted by , hlm, for" the bene(n of ano~her or of another and ·
" , the owner;\The perso~ who reposes or declares the confidence is called the Write 11 short nOli
on" : ConJtrut::tivc
author of the , trust; the. person_ who .a ccepts the. conrJdence " is called the
trust.
, truste~, the person for wh'q's~- benefit the confidence Is accepted Is ' called
-
~.:-
,. the beneficiary; the subject "matter of the trust Is cailed trust propertYi and
S.U. 0 01. 85
~1.y 91
\
~
the " instrument by which the tr:ust is declared Is called th e instrument of Apr. 92
trust. ., ,
I
t ~

,.,CJ
T!ZlJ.snSe: When a person h.s prbpe~iy ' or rights which he holds or Is bound to
Write IJ short not~
exer:cise for or on behalf of "another or others or for the accomplishment of
L
,.,
~. : ,
some particular purpOse or particular purpose.s , he Is sa id to hold the
property or rights In trust for that :other or those others or for that purpose
,on : T.ru;te~,
B.U. Oct. 92

J
or those purposes and he Is" call<:d a trustee, (Halsbury's Laws of England
4th Edn. Vol. 48)
T Trust as " defined in this section of the Specific Relief Act" Includes an
XI
obli gation In the .nature ?f trust. An ot)ligation in the nature of a t~st may be
~ an implied trust, and resulting trus~ or a constructive trus~.
Sec. 11 lays down that In the absence o f a contrary provision in the Act,
, ,." - ~

• r ',, '
'/" . <t,' Z

'"'"
. ,.=_,::=Ii"

"
-. . ' .
 \
:::- - -
. ""," "",,'..: --- --_._ .. _.
I·

. ; ~. ,

" ~: THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

, l •.
: specIfic performance of a contract maYI~' I(l " the discretion' of the Court, be
enforced whel) the act ~greed to be done . Is In the performance
wh91ly or partly of a trwt. However, a.-contract made by a trustee cannot be
• r specificallY enforced whe'n It Is In excess pf his powers or when It I! In breach
of trwl.
· . The' general authority of a trw tee Js defined by Sec .. 36 'of the Indian
, :rr:u:s-~ Act, 1882. ' According1y, a ' trus"tee may, in addition "to the powers
i
-.fr~-
,,
·,'. e'xjiressly conferred by the Trwt5 Act, and by the instrumen.t of trust and
. . .

i
~
subfect to the restrictions contained in tI .. Trusts Act and the trwt instru"1ent,
'. do all acts which are reasonable ~nd proper for the realisation, protection or
~ene~it of a beneficiary who Is Incomp~tenr to contract , · Ho.~ever, no trustee
shaU, 'C,xcept ~th the permission of the principal Civil Court of o'rigi(lal jurisdic tion, .
\ I~ase trust p~operty for a term exceeding 21 years or without .reservj.ng the
best yearly rent which can be rClIosonably obtained.
',:.>, A ~stee "mwt act ' bond fide' and 'as a ~an of ordinary prudence' In th e
exercise of his ' powers and duties . He must · exercise his discretionary power
· .r~onably and jn good ~ faith~ rr he does so he Incurs no liability· for any loss
th~.t may arise to the trust. A trustee should not place himself in a positiQn in
as
which hls . duUes trustee are In connlct with his personal Interest. A trustee
entrusted with sale is there'fore not allowed to buy the property himself, A
b"ustee Is not. allowed under the Indian Jaw t~ 'buy the beneficiary's Interes t
without the permissio n of a principa.1 Civil Court of original Jurisdiction . Such .
i. permIssIon shall not be given unless the proposed purchase (mortgage or lease)
,,r .~.
'
~ manifestly· for the advantage o f the beneficiary. Under the English law. a
trustee may buy from c~lul que tn'nt provided he deals with the benefiCiary at
, '- arm's length and ' makes a full disclosure 'o f knowledge acquired by him in the
.management of the trust.
JlJuslr.:tlions
"; ;''' (a) 'Z bequeaths land to A. "not doubting that he Will pay thereout an
. annuity of Rs, 1,000 to B for his . life, " A accepts the bequest. A is a trust.e,
. 'withln the 'meanlng bf thls ·Act. for.8, to the extent of the annuity, "
• 1
.
.+ "'(hi :.n; th~ l.g.l: medical or spiritUal adviser of B. By avalUng himself of "
hi; ~ltu.ation as such advis er, A gains some pecuniary advantage which might
'oth~lse hAv~ occurred to ' B. A is a trustee, for B, \/.Iithln the meaning of this
:Ac't. of s~ch ~dvantage. · , ... . .
(c) A, being 8 's banl:e-:, discloses for his own purpose the state' of 8's
accpunt. A is a trustee, '.vi thin the meaning of this Act, for B, o f the. ben efit
ga1i:ied by him by mew oj such dL"dasure.
'0 C(d) A, ili'e mortgage ,= of certain leaseholds, renews the lease in his own
'L.
name. A Is a trustee, within the meaning of this Act, of the renewed lease, lor
..~s:~
... Int~rested
,' ,
In the original leas·e. .
." (e) A, one of several partners Is employed to purchase goods for the firm .
A, unknown to· hls co-partners supplies them, at the market-price, wl'th goods
f pr~loysly ~ught by hl~elf when the price was lower, and thus makes. a
,r r
coruid-erable profit. A ,; a trustee, for hi s co-partners within the meaning of
this Act, qf the profit so made. . .
,\;, '
;;.f' (0 A , the ~a~ager of S's I. ~d~g·o facto ry, becomes -agent for C, a venqor .-
.. ,' .
... ,
~
,

, "
- .;:e"·..,--....- - ; ... .., :-~

- Z:
,
I

f
...
/
. I

. .;."

. .." ....-•. .,. I, '.-i."':· !! L- ,;, " :i" :'-·~,

:.. d:; ~~.:i!':(' !. : ~ u, ' -,!? :-~ · :· ~·{~i.!:'30 1Cil.q ',:; %.oS ;.: ~·..i
· ~f.lndlgo-s •• d, . and r.celv.s ';'withour: EJ's · ass.nt .commlssinn .on _.tli~ s.• •.d
'p~:~-ch~s;d' !f~~W\f)f:;to~""the':f~~'to':"!/?i' its ~~ t1J·s'i~e·:!JwJihi~~·tI~~[ f ~ ~n·lrt~~f .' this ·
;, " . .:.t,'_ I.- :' I;i f'lh v . ''' . ; , ' ~ i.,l,:.'" ~~ '~' \:" .:).·,~ i" . ,~ ~- ,~ ,.•n'flv,: ,~',-.:..t.q ~ .... ,",:, ~ .... :.:t " ;':
\ Act,, ' for
, ' ,r
.. B,o · e' commls5Ion · so· .receJveul ·~ ::'· :- : '~ I ' _. ,i ~ ,?rl' ; . 'l ~ ' . , . .,. .,'
, ' : I .. . · ~,;i ,' . I.;' .' .~. ;;J . , ., •. ,; . ~ ') .. ~ • • ,:. I ·\... ; . ' :.\··· .. !.:~ ....·J l, ·"~ . u- __ .., l~ i ll .f, ' .'
• ..• , (g) 11, li<!ys certaIn landwith,.notic. ~t B has , ,already . cOl)IT,'c~· t.o. buy.,l!.
.~ - A Is a trust.e, WIthIn the m~rirng . ofth!s :Act, 'fm'B, ·owp. so bough!. "anq..
• . {h) A 'buys rend from e, havIng noti~. 1hai C is in occop;rtlon of th,·land .
:r A omits to make any Jnquiry 2!.S to the nature of C'S Jnteresf -thereIn . .14 15 ' ~
trustee, within the meanln~ of this Act, for C, to ' the extent ·of that Interest.
" THE SPECIRC RELIEF ACT AND THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT
Section 2(el provides that the words which have not been : defined In this
Ad -are "to 'be 'COnStrueil :In 1he "Same "Sense os "they' 'hatll! 'been uli{j;,ro "In 1t're
··Indian ·Gontroct Act. ·For ·example, -words ·like oge~~, egreement, -consideration,
'[rauCl, misrepresentation, an~ contract are to 'be construed in fhe ,same manner
as they have b~en defined in the Contract ,Act.
3. SaviW/5 Except as otherwise provided herein, noth ing in
this Act shall be deemed,
(a) to deprive any person of . any Tight to Tenef, other th an
specific perfom1ance, which he may have under any contract; .
or ., -

..
-~

,.
,"
(b) to affect the operation ' of Registratic.n Act, 1908, on
documents.
The purport of this ser.tion is to make It clear that ~hc Specific Rel ief Act
does not take away the right of relief which Is given under the Contract Act.
But in addition to those reliefs available unJer the Contract Act , It gives
I
additional reliels,
This section also makes it clear that the provisions of the Registration
Act regarding documents, are not aHected by the provisions of this Act.
4. SpeCific relief to be granted onlv for enforclnq individual
civil riqhts and not for enforcing penal laws. - Specific
relief can be granted only for the purpose of enforcing
individual civil rights and not 'for the mere purpose of enforcing
. a pena~w, ' !
i
\ Section0Y4ays down that a. Rerson is entitled to specific . relief only Write" short note

,,i .
when he has individual ci vil rights an d the provisions of the Act 'cannot be on : Sped!ic reb'e!
used for enforce~ent of penal laws , is to be gr4ntcd
f It ls, no doubt, true that the object of the specific relief i.s to prated only 10 f!nfo re~
ell/II rights.
.' the ci ...·il rights of an Individual or· to prevent ' the commission of Injury to
B.U. Oct. 87
stich 'rights , Hot, "the effect of "the -word ·... mere .. 'in "the $ection 'shoold 'nat 'be
\ ignored. Speciflc' relief is not avaiiable when the sale ob eel is to enl ce
!
~rifl)fnal ,;w.·
There ore, spec! Ie re Ie can be obtained where the granting
th~rieol would include the enforcement of a penal law, if such relief is
f merely i":cidental or ancillary to the ,g r~nt of s.peclfic relief for any other
! purpose, ,Alth ough, the Court cannot prevent the commission.. of criminal
.. ... . ..r ..,
\,
- i
-1 ,

"
'.
J
 ~.... - ....--. . ...
-
-~------.- . ----~. ~

(-:. . -- ------ ..... - .---. - - - - - - - - - -

I
i

8 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

; ',,;

acts as a protection of some c(vii ' ~ight or the prevention o f a ci vil WfOf1S.
the ,Court c~n be called on to grantsp'e cilic relief-not because the criminai
offences h",ve' been committed, or to give a better' remedy tn the case of a
.crjminal .of(~nce-.but .the jllrisdJcti~n .of .the Cour.t .to .gJ:aQt .s.pecific '.r.eli-Cf
rests on the ground of Injury to any lega"' Interest. S..eeci(lc relief. being a
civil remedy • . the plaintiff. must show some individuai right to claim either
"
.Re ormance of what is due to him or repression o ( wrong committed or
threatened against him in particu ar.
~
I'
- Specific reUd how given
. S.peclfic relief may be given in any of the follOWing ways, viz.:
(a) By taking p·o s.session of certain property and delivering It to its , .

claimant (5s. 5-8).

(b) By ordering a party to do th e very act which he is under an

i
I
obligation to do (55. 9-33, I.e., Specifit.: Performance, Rectification,
Rescission , Canc~lIalion.
(c) By prevent.ing a 'party from doing that which he Is under an oblig::}tion

I
f not to do. I hiS IS called 'preventive relief", I.e.; injunctions (55. 36-
I 43).
I·
I.
(d) By de ~ermfning and declaring th e rights of parties otherwise than by
an award of comp~·nsation, e. g., Rectification ·of instruments (5.
26), Rescission .of contracts (55. 27·30), Cancellation of instruments
. (5s .. 3J-33) and Declarato'ry decree (5 •. 34-35) .

. :-

i· ~.f --
I .

I.
!
".' 't ,!.
I

,i·
,• - f:
!. r '
i- !
< , i
Ir
I I

f'
i·

."
I

'- .
'.

!
_.' " 1", ..
.~ '.' .'
i .
i
"- '1

,
•

,.
'-
-.
'.
 ,
, !
ll
7] "

-'
-· 1·
e '. J
.
- !
~
-

...
,
. :.':l
... -- i'"
,.
. ,!
I
5. Recovery of sp~c/fJc ImmoViibre property.:....A person
entitled to the possession of specific Immovable property may
, r,ecover it in the manner provided by , the Code of Civil Procedure',
1908 .
. .Thls section lays down a general proposition of law ."that a person, who
Is entiti2d to the possession of specific Immovable property on the ground '
o'f the title , may rccovc'r It In the' manner provided by the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908. The Civil Procedure CO Ii! provides for a suit for ejectment
.on the basis or title. .
~Uit by person dispossessed of immovable properly, Wh4t relief ·is
f
. ' (i) if · any' pers~n is dlspos~essed without his consent of
provide¢ to d
,
.'f, \ ! tf.)f immovable property otherwise than in due course of law,
person who is
di~possessed with-
~ 'Y' \ ~e or any person claiming through , Mm may, by suit,
out his consent of

"I j
immoYlJble pro-
, {j"vI , recover possession thereof, notwithstanding any other title perty o therwIse

.. , 'jt , that may be set up in, such suit, . thdn in due cou~
:it · , of ldw ?
(ii) No suit under this ,section shall be brought·
i ~ . .I . B.U, Ap'- 8S

... ,
.,
-~. ~
'~' { .
"'f ' ,
,'
'

.
(a~ after the expiry of six months from the date of
dispossession; or
(b) ag~inst the Gove;nll1ent.
Discuss , : -Pass#!'-
ssory '!·tle is good .
,4gi!Jinst ifll persons '
,,
,
• I
,l' ~, r- (iii) No appeal shall lie frorri -:any:' order or decree passed itl
suit instituted under' this ,sectio~: nor shall any ' review of
except the lrlfe
owner.
. B.U. <Xt. 86 '
any such order ~r decr~~i be '31l0wed.
II J (iv) Nothing In this section ~~<!Il'. bara'ny person from suing
How CAn d person '"
to establish his title \ to "'such property and to' recover
I, , ' dispOSSessed of an _
II; - possession thereof. ;';; immoy"ble . "pro- ,
1 This ' se·c tlon PfovldeS'·a' specific '··a nd .speedy remedy · tOj'a person ,$i~o pc..rty. rccovl!r
I
. has been evicted from Immovable prope~ty otherwise than in due course' of possession. of -it
I · i~w:_ .Unqer, thLs sectio n, p·o He'ssion Is sufftcient evidence .of right as against under the Spedfic
T l me trespasser. If Jl. pla lnti f( proves thllt he ,WlIS In possession of immovable Rl'Hf!f Act. 196i?
B.U. Ap,. 90
,I . property and he . was d ispossessed nofln due course .o f law, he can recover
!he !posscs s i6n or such property wit hout reference to any quest"io n of tit1~:t
....::: :,'.. .
t
.
. ,I ,.~ ~,

,
. .. . -f ~ _.
- ~- ., _ . -
--.------ - -- - --'-:-.:'7'!
~ -~: ~i"~~~~0i'
;
'. .

- ....

\.l
',',
\" , "
 ~----'--
r ,. J
" .-'

.' 10 THE SPECII'IC RELIEF ACT

Comment on th.
, following by giving
'ilIUsIr.1Ion ,-
(Bodroas v. Dharm, AJ ,R, 193'3, All,
541), The main object of this secli.o n
is to discourAge people from taking th~ law into their own hands however T
I -- ,
I :.
good theIr title may be. It does not." want a j)erson who has forcibly tak~n
possession of an Immovable property to retain it, so that the motive for
· faJ PosusJCrY 111M
. , ~ gpcd .g.oinst .u . rclbly taking of Immovable property Is discouraged,
I · p.,ion. Ur:4pt M. hat may the i' lalntl(f ·do to succeed under this section?
Irv. ot.mer.
i Xhe plaintiff hl's to prove the' follOWing '0 succeeu in a suit under

I ~fta J~not.
5P«i1k rdM .
~ction 6 :
(I) that he was in p~ssession.
I on -
to ., pll'Son til.· . .(il) ibaJ be N o:> bee.o d.is,PO$·s·cHed oj the .irm:novahh.: .prope.rly.
pos••ss.d of .n
Immo~~bJ. -, pro- (iii) that ' the dispossession took place without th e consent of the
perty wlthoot du. llI~tnUff ,
pt'OC... 01 Ioiv. ;;. (l~) that such <l1$pos~esslon was not in due course ·of law.
a.u. cia. 90
(v) that the dJspossesslon took place wlthl,n six months before the
, OcL 92 ,'
, " Institution of the suit.
[n ~ 5U'jt under ·s ec. 6 the plaintiff can aver only prev io us possession
. ,a nd dispossession by the dcfcndan.t . otherwise than in due course of law
withJn six months from the suit ..being brought and claim recovery of possessio!).
Any ' other averment or claim made by the plalntiH will not be rel evant (or
. :',\ ... decision of the suit under sec. 6 and the Court in such a case, ;~oul d
ignore such irrelevant averments and claims and confine itself to t~e averment
~~ possession ~n d thc clC\im for rec~v~ry of possession only. (Shri Mddon .
Sil19h v. 5hri Ta(uab Hlusain. (1989) 2 Gau. L. R. 275J . This jyrisdiction
I of the court under thi s 5~c ti? n is very li.m ited . !t can, neither 'adjudicate on
I the quesnoll of title nor eLI ' it give anycfuccfron"-rn regard to removal- of

II, '
'structures, Ii any, erccteu=on-Chl? land as SlJch a directiq~ "wili l,'e bcyona
'." . th es-Cope~' o f poWers-con1erred on the' ~C~u'it by this' sectio~ ~ - . ~-
, .. ~
~ I '·~~ ·-~ ····" ..... ~ _. . .
IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
There is a consid'i!rable difference of opinion on the question as to
.:: 'D.I;'~U .tb. -: '4W wi1ether the term immovable property under this section would mean only
.,
t= •• :
i' r,.,.iln'i":'t'o,·-th.
'<. re~ Of "jXjs•. actual and physlcai' object or it would also Incltlde other benefits arising out
" , ,.;ision "oI··sp.alic of land ,
I', 1~ -
I. '. i;'mov4bl. 'pro-
:'pe;iy' ~;"der the
The' term immovabl'e 'property is not defined in th e Specific Relief Act. ~
I ·
"
,I· I
.. Spod/lc R.JJJ Act,
','C;, a,Uj
NoY, 76
But the General qauses Act defines it as follows :-
"Im;novable property shall Include land, ' 'benefits to arise ' out of land
i
. 1'.' ~
I ' , . : , .--' Jan, 79 and things attached to the .e arth or permanently fastened to any thing j
i
I ..~: . ~:'- t.::. );~b\-~~'~~~"::
attached to tne eilrth . " i
i
.
The Calcutta High Court has held that immcwable property, as used I·
~
-/"
· • ~-{:' '. ~~ . 87 . I, I
under this section , wOldd mean only actual and physical obje~t (SlIa! v. i

J ,
!... I
, ; · , :.,. '.. ,;y~ :' ~; '
, Del.nney, ' 34 L C. 450). On the other hand, tl)e Htgh Court of Bombay ~c :
· ~ la ::'h~i(;,oJ.
. has hel~ that immov.able pro ert would include 'e ven incorporeC'11 ri hts like
-' an ' : "'A' suit by '"
i
,[
~ pO
e/son wh'c;-"h4S . ,Tight to fI'sh, '(Bhrmda' Pa;'d~ 'y, Pa" "'pos,
· QQin . i~Jiy .,dis- . r High 'Court . has taken a view siMilar . to that of
-Born , ~21j. -T-b. -Ma'dr.-s
Bombay and has held that
.
/: '
.. Po.ssaud. 01 Im- ,right of terry~ standing .crops and right to collect rents are' immovable
I;
I
. I
movabl. P."'p4rljl:
, ' . S.U. .May 84
pr9perty for the purpose of this . ·sectlon . (A/panna v. Krishndmma, A. f.R
1935 Mad . 134),
i d..:
;i ' 0
i
, ! tt ...
, ·t···.... . . ··
, i i
.\
. '-lji::,,"
_----,"
·'· r' ? .. ·! ·';:! ~,:;;:!
-"'.:,.!.";."
-~-

~'. r
 - I

,;L
.:'.' -'
r . _. , :;,
•
! . :.'i:;. ,
.j , ,-, /:q '
",:
,,_ RECOVERING :OSSE~I,ON,, ?F PROPE~TY ' ". , . 11
"'
"
" . ,,~ ' .
,
', ' . " , ..... ' ~ ·' I :r· : .~!.".. I .. , . .. ·~.. ·1'.·~, ;, ·;,;.·: ·· ··i·" ,...:, I ! '~- t ~" }· fl :; 1 '~v:~... ",.
OTHERWISE THAN IN DUE COURSE OFLAW,-- ', ,';' ',' ,
,
ij
. ,:~
.. :,(;~
..
,.0\
-- . ,. ':.'';I';t(J~:; ~~~~~~' ~f '·,:ja ~~ '.:;rii~fC">;":j*jJili;~~~~\'~~I~-/~~:o';rri'~r:b ~~'~f1 ifii~ ~ff~~t .Ill .,
::',;, ' lal~(" It ' \';ill not b~ :, ln' due' c'ci~rsel·.' 6 law;1.~l · (h~ " Clispcis5esston :h'as·'been .'bY ", Writ. ·~ ~horl note
• !~re9al );rhc~s' ' ~hibh ~~ilgHt 'r;ot·'to~·.M~!fg~·hi~~p'pti'ea: fo~' :~ari1pl.i~·~~6!S~sf6·n ·: ..on 'Remedy to , \0\
o6t~I;;'td ih.o~gfi'i:~ ' bfiic.;;:of ; 'ih'-" C6';fi)):;ho' . i~ '.n;t . ,~;'ii'i~I,e:di'8iCi;ln , -penon ·(Ji,pon- " t\
.. • ' . '. " . ' .',

A.l,R. 1951 My.: 101): ', "

' ; ," . ... :. . II - . ,

,. ' i' "

.,' . " " ,. . . ."
.tha.t .dlr:ecUon Js .not In .due .course .of law. ~ Annopchana "JJ. /unm..er:cHand, · ·t!$s.d ",f on im-
'" inoVllble property.
~
r<\

A person is said to ,be !dis'posse~s~d ' btherWise· than In , due course of Jaw B,U, Oct. 89
'II
If he Is_ dispossessed by ' another acthig of his own authority and without the '0
Interve'ntlon . of a court ' · of ' la:w. · The . words ·· ··-1 d~e cours~ of 01
DiscuS$ the rights
law; are not merely equivalent to' the word le,gally, for a 'thing Yfhlch is of 0 person dis- ,'"
perfectly legal may .'still be by no means the regular, normal ' process possessed of an ' 1\\
and effect of law operating on a matter which .has been ·Iald before it
for adJudication . Thus though a landlord Is ,entitled to possession of his land
immov"ble p .ro- .
pony without duo """"
from his tenant ati:er the expiry of the period of tenancy yet if the tenant process of
B,U, Oct. 91
"'w.
'" i

>, ....... ;
holds over he may not dl.spossess him ' of !-tIs own autlJ9.dJy. If he does so it
15 compefeht to 'rueUie "ari,flord 'for- p~;sds-I~~'- und~r this section .
, Ip East clndia Hotels Ltd, v, Syndicate Bank ((1992) , 2 Clv, LJ, ' 497
S.C.], -the Synclicate Bank had been occup"ying e> prem'l ses of EIH as licensee
and it co"n tinued In possessi~n despite termination of the licence . Sudd~nJy
a fire broke 'out rendering the ' premises unfit for carrying on its business
and the Bank temporarily shifted to another place. After renovation ' EIH
refused to accommodate the Bank in the prem ls e~ and the Bank filed a suit
under sec. 6 . .The ·que.sUon was whether the suit could ~ucceed . Kasllwel, J.
was of , the view that after termination of the lic~nce the Bank became
.. trespassers and the law would not assist · him in th~ · recovery of posse$sion
a~d the ~uit must fall. Ramaswamy J" , however, held , that the suit should be
d.~cr~~d . ..~j
.In the .above .case, .explaining .t he .w ords "{lue course .01 Jaw" the Supr:eme
Court held that in each particular: ca.s e It means such an .exercls~ ·· of the
power by duly constituted Tribunal or Court in accordance with the procedure
e.stablished py law under such safeguards for th'e protection of ,.Individual
. rights . In its. compreh'e nslve \ sense}t means a course of legal p'roc~edings "
according tq the· rules and principles ' whi~h"' have been ·established in our
:~_:,jystem of jurisprudence for the enforcement · and ,' ''-otection. of private rights.
:~; Thus, th(lr~ mu~'t be a Tribunal or Court ~ompeient to d'ecid~ the 's ubject
matter of the su it or ·proceeding·, s'crVice 'o( process ' on defendant, person
affected should have right to be ' present before the Court or "Tribunal which
pronounces judgement upon the· questi·o~ of life, liberty o~ property, he
should be "giyen right to be heard, right of controve rsy by proof, and ' every'
mciterial fact whic.h bear~ on the question o f fact or liability must be
conclUSively proved --or presuf"{ied against him.
In GIr4jdwo'a "
BdsawWa (AIR 1991 Karl. 51), Ihe plaintiff wh ile In "'~
no
possession was nlawfully dis.possessed by the act of the defendants t ' and >Q.
'. therefore.s~ ile a suit under rights conferred by S. 6. Her title was
:.. dlsputed ' by'-the defendants. It was held that the question of considering title
,.0

."" ....
does " not arise in a suit under .5. 6, If plaintiff proves Illegal ads of
dispossession it Is sufficien t to give her the cause of action as well ' as the
"'"
-j rell ef.

,~," ~

\.
 , . ,', '
12 'THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT
;.~
'"I-:5·;~

Answer the follow.jng glv~ .ng ' reaso ns-

A person .is dispossessed, without his consent, of two Immovable properties .'
·~ " .ou

i ·
. ,X and Y respectively otherwise than in due course of law. He Is dispossessed
'. ' ' of ' y by the Central Government' which has no title to It. He is dispossessed -~ -~,:;;

..,
", ' -

+':' ~ ;,:,.',' " • ".'."

of )( by the person 'really entitled to it:
Has he ~ny · right to sue In ehher Wet ~ • w,
'

., :', ,' ':: . .. case l!nder Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 ? (B. U. Dctob';r,:' 81) d'lJ
(5 '.-4;
Writ. ","shorl · note
,,'on · ,; -<.Juridic,,1
Ans.·- In this case, under Sec. 6, no suit shall be brought a~ainst the
Gov~rnment. Therefore, the person has no right to recover possession of Y ".
No ~'• .-- N
·po$sfl~ilon.
, ' B,U,. Apr. 83
which he Is dispossess '~ d 'of by the Central Government. He can ~ue th e
pe'r ~ on ' r.eally entitled t~ It ror possession under Sec, 6 o f the Act. m
he. .',
.m
;> ~ /'~"\ ' .~~.~ -:.~ ~
" , &:l ~ 1~POSSESSION fn .~ lr

/I'V
. f:'
. - . ,;,'!, . . "
\l~ •.. ·. ~
~. "'. ",
, • . :";'" . , .
' ~ '''~''''W{i~~ 4;\sbori nqle 'P!Jssession must be uridical ossesslon and not merely actual possess ion,
kf
,Th~. possessi9 1') the plaintiff must be actual and nol constructive. The I.IIi
10
he
)n.
\11
.t,
: r'"fI . ~ ...' ~\P.J,l ~(~.R~~l(on . ol For ,example. -possession as a , custodian or as a mere servant Is no Jur Ic_al 'lc,.:; 1
.' -I ' .. . dlsws"ssad hoI- . possession so as to entitle him to maintain a suit und.er this · sectlon. ;
Jr. ,
' f-9i.l~"'1 i '~er. ';(': '" :i .
,Similarly, a trespas se r' who has been dispossessed cannot sue under thi s h is
ll>V'll ~ B.U. Apr. 88
section, Howe.v er, it · has been held by the BO ~llbay HiHh Cou rt that the · the
~n . afl" 'owne~' of posse~,sion . of a tenant. holding ove r, after the termin ation of i:h;tenancy 15
,

~
I ,js

lin ,:nunova.ble pro-

juridical and therefo re, such a tenant can sue his landlord for recove ry of o~
perty ", . reco ver P<?s~~sion u~der this sectl;'n if the landlord had possessed without the im the
possession fordbly consent of the tenant. (Rudrappa v. Nara£ingrao, (1905) 29 Born. 213). , lid ,
{rom the 'following , Can , trespasser sue ?
co
persons lit./1o lutl ' in
physical poss- A 'mere ~spas se r cannot by the very act or trespass., lmmediate l~ and :.; ur.and
ession thereof ;- .
(i) Trespuser.
til} "r en4nt under lJ
deled/lie ' lease.
without acguiescenc e consider himse lf to be in possession against to e person
whom hi' ;jects. -The true owner can without reas onable delay re-ent~r upon
,

· the property. The true owner can recove r possession forcibly from such ' o'\ucfi -
.
mc.SOA
F
Pfl p-on

trespasser. Even if such re -entry is fo rcibll!, thl! trUl! o.wncr cunno l bl! slied "!" thii ll cd - ,
, ! -~
(iii) Serv:,nt. by the trespasser who has en t~red by force or fraud either b r recovery of L\'; s~~ ,?i_
S.U. June 75 _ possession . under Section' 6 'or fo r 'ejectment upon the str,e ng th of his i I an hi~
Noy. 76
· temporary prior possession which he had never lost. (tvlustapha Sahib v, !~ pe~b' u, _
': ..·-.:··.C- . Apr. 81
Sanlha ' Pillal, 23 Mad. 189). i; an ~,
Ir: ; .,:
: . ~ ~ : _~(.;; ? 7
'.:;;:: '. ---. . writ• •
",': I •.

short note ~ Tenarit or lessee • 1'[ Sui

,-. ' ; . , . ., U . _.
~i. '~ " .: ;.; . : on "7 : R«ovltl}l of .~, ;A' te".la,~f ~oldlng' over cannot be forcib ly dispossess'ed , Such tenant. can H ,t_fan ~." ..
/' ', . po,sasJon 01 1m.
J Inv,ok~ the protection of Section 6. Similarly, a tenant ,by sufferance, i.e., aU'. thee.,-.a :
1 ,".' mov"bltt property
person who con~inues in poss,esslon of the property after the expiration of ~ pO!;)n 6.J .
forcibly from d
vtlSp4snr: th~ tenanc v,' c.a nnot be re garded as a mere trespasser, his: entry ·w~s lawful ,~ . nota.~rul '
, a'nd. th~'refore, he cannot be forcibly ejected, If he is so ejected; he can ~ dilf~can
, B.U,
. Apr. 82
..... . .
" ' invoke the protec-tion of Section 6, . . Rth e:'" ,
.;.
'
Servant ' ' , " tl pro " "
. .. ~n-~i-~;)?ecovery of , . . Wtht .
fX?ise$sion of im- · /" A servant can be forCibly ejected. He cannot sue his ma.ster : under ~!l b lu nder
'j
mOJl~bl' property Sectio n 6 in respect of property left in his care; b.e cause a s.~rva nt or a 0:; a ({9:
, ' .' frem ~ ~ irfU~sser. , manager who exercise control in a purely representative capacity cannot be
, ~

said to be ' in juridical p6~session. , (BaWd Chh"alagir v. ,\;Ioionomal, .·'.4 , su

lot ba.. -
a f'ltJal
f , 4 I'
, , '
B.U. May 87
I.C. ' 359) .' . ,',
DISPOSSESSION
d is~ •
!- r.si
I r

" Th..! disposses si on of the pl~lntifr mus t be. physi cal: It must ' be' actual f pad. ac:~211

" : '"
, ~
.,?"
.
 ,

(
). . "

'i-L ~ECOVEillNb'\8S,?EFlq~'§F.P~OPERTY ' .. ;' i~ '

,;- . . .' :.~." '. . ,~i{ · " J ~' ~, ~ ,".i . ~d ; ~.
! . I) ; ' ;~I ; ;:" ;",TU .•. ,.!:
_ '"ouster. Mere Interference ' with the :rlgHts ·'of. enloym ~ nt of ,the ' propc~ly ~ oes,,'
!rties~ '1
. :. not conStitute;i(lIipo'fs"isslbrt!JF.6r·~ e.Xa%pl~~.~~Hle ;';li ero~ iifenU,;ned:'-;a~iS~{iiie .:
:ssed . neld
, .
coh5t1tut~!idlspossession
':not , to':" " , ., ' " I "
! , .).-;. I '~: •:)IJ < .,',~ "I , ' '1~ lO':~'- ,
" ~
'j : 00 )'h~t l :~ j ;..t
, -, " .,'., ,
- ! .
.II ss'ed .: ·, :uWl\ere; ith.Y)..'rnfiff.W.~ ;IIiGclti61 !pbs'seslibH' bi I~~d ·up'oi{ \Vhlch';miifkel ·: .
. .!tii~r
.- . wis l 'held ' .hd ··t'i1e' 'i!rjp'os'$~~ion· ·c'dmpl61ii.ll' dl 'Ii.iS'''Te~liz.u';ii;'iil ' lons~l;y'ihe:i
(

··,:.W~ _ def~ndai1t from :StaU·kteejiers,· If was:theld," $ucn· realiutlor(:was! dis~s:;esslo ~ ~not

• , the '" (Son!i Mi."v . . Pr.k.sh, A.LR . · 1940· CoL '464) . .. ',: . '. .., ..- .
" .' . ~ . ,. i, ') " , . !' ' " " ,
of Y Notwlths.li,ndiiig ahy. (j'th.r .'tltfi...·that'ri,.y"b." sel up in such sui!
. , '. • ,:_ • '.'" ~ ~. ,. • •• :: ;::I l \ ' , I~ " .• /,. -!. . ,_' . . .f
,
., If the .suit Is brought within the prescribed p.riod, . thot is, within six Writs " shorf note
monthS'rrom the date of disp'ossesslo'n even the rlghtr!J1 owner Is precluded on : Recovery 01
from showi.ng his title 't o th~ lan~. A p~'rson who has been dispossessed , possession lorcib}y
from tTcspcus~r,
within six months can successfully sue under Section 6. And hi s reference
Th.J.
. wiLrhe
' 1'0 S.U. June 77
lion. '_ on. to his titl'e to the property i~ · lrrele~ant.
die_a!' ~ ~~ Ie,al .>
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A SUIT UNDER Comp.us . .d
tlc n. ,? ion. contr4st posses.sol}/'
THIS SECTION AND AN ORDINARY SUIT -FOR
this :; thi s remedies wilh pro-
the --11 '. the POSSESSION OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY prietdry remedies
, provided und~r the
:y Is ;~ y is UNDER SECTION '5
SpecifIC Relief Act.
y of y of This section doeo; bar an erson from suing to es tab lish his title to 1963.
the ~ im, the imm~vaole property and t6 recov er possesslon .o such ro e rt . s uit on S .U. Jan. 79
). ~., 1iI11. tme or poss-ess on can e ' roug t y any aggrieved person . . S uch a suit Apr.-52
~ ~ co u could be brought within i 2 y.e ars from the date of th e d i s~c ssession, But
~:'tq>d ond
i under Section 6 o f this Act, 'the ~umm ary suit could be brought within 6 Bring out the
,and
distinclion between
rson .... ..rn~rson months from th e date 'of th ~ di sposs ession . \un der this sec.tion, the mere
possflssory reme-
IPon" : p~oJPon proof of possession i~ enough for the pla inti ff to succeed, while in an dies iJnd propdc-
.. iuch .,'I ~di'such
;ued _~ Jhhsued
Oral nar y suit t he! plaTilTITTnas to . p:-oye his title. One more restri ction under
. tfils section Is tha t a suit cannot , be brought aga inst the Government. The
Idry rCn1t!dics pro-
vided under the
y 'or' " s,!itry of suit undf'r this section Is not appealable. Ne ith er can there be any review o f Specific Relief Act.
his Z .;....\ n 1 his an order or de cree f-assed under this section, The only rem edy left to a 1963.
"'.: .... , -,v .• j per1Ib v. person, who is aggrleved . by an order or decree under th is sectio n, Is to rile B.U. Ooc. 75
- I·.· 1 an , .
-. .,h: :,· St!ii -
,,"n ' ordinary ~suit on the basis of his title: June 77
Moy 79
. S,u lt brought . alter 6 ' months from t ~ e date of dispossession Apr. 80
1can . :-It can '''As c,,"n be 's een from above" If a suit Is brought alter 6 months frpm
L; :.~ thel:e., 0 ·the date of dlspou e.ssion, the lalntiff has to prove that he was In p revious Write" short note
r ".f,po-.,on' 01', o ~sesslon and that he-was dispossessed not In due course 0 aw . e nee on " Distinction
between posses-
jliful ' noi lo",fu r not prove his' tit e ' 0 sue Immbva e property, However, t ere was a
. -sory remedies " nd
:..a·n :~,'ffte can difference of opinion · among the ' various -High Courts In [n dJa as to whether propriet.try reme-
·1-~ ·.'· ' . . "le - the pla in tiff . would be en titled to recover possession of that Immovabl e- dies. ,
J.. \.
,. proJ property from the trespasse r who has dJsp ~ssessed without proving title if B.U. Apr. 75
l.. the , . . the suit wlls. . l.J~<?ught arler six months, ' This controversy has becn set at rcst No .... 80
ider b ,- under by the . d ecis ion of Supreme Court In Somnath Burman v, Dr. S . P. Raju Nov. 82
; y J .
>r. a Cl9i t or 0 (1970) A.LR. S, C. 846). in"this case. Supreme COl"t held that as against
t be ' nol be
a ..... rongdot;:r; prior possession ,of the plaintiff in any action of ejectment is
, . 4 \' . fWl.71ol, 4 SuHiclent even If the 'suit be brought more than six mdnths after the act of
I ." _ ,su f"

:,':, " ~~dispc~ dlspossesslan, 'It w~s fll'r the l , held that the wrongdoer canno t succeSSfUllY,
'· it.· . resis rulst the' suit by shOWing tha t !be title and .right to possession are in third
tua l . p~rt~ actual ~. Thus, under the Indi an, as under, the · English Law, possessio n IS a
,.. -.:;;,
I' '
•,

,
 .~- --- ... -- ... .. - .,. _- -- -.
,
1
THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT
- .,
good title against all but the true owner.
'~'j.,.'
Pos~e.sJory remedie.5 dls'tlnguished (rom proprietary remedies
~ The right of possession as such receives protection from the law: Under
~ I
SecuOr1:bof the Specific Rehef Act; a person dispossessed from 'Immovable
:': ; . e( Write 4 short nottl
property can su~· for restoration of_possession . If he brings the suit within .
on : Poss.ssory
six months from the date of poss~sslon rye can sU9ceed on mere proof of
remedies.
S.U. OCI. 84 his prior possession. The defendant cannot resjst 'tbe 'suit by 'setung Up a
title In himself . . The q'u estion of ownership or title to the property is
., lrrelevant in such a suit. Even If the defendant had a better title, he must
first surrender possession to the plai nt iff and theo bring his own 'suit based
\ . ',' ..... ' .. upon his ' title. This proprietary ' rem edy of the defend ant Is distinguished
from the possessory 'remedy afforded to the plaintiff under Section 6 of the
Act.
·r .'. .
./ The ratlof"Jale behind possessory remedies
There are three reasons lIS to why a legal system affo.ds possessory
.: . .. .
remedies even aga'i nst the true owner. They are as follo ws:
; ." .. -, .... ~Il vl.o lent self-help Is permitted, preservation or pl.!ac e and order
~. ..'." :. , .•.. would be a't stake. Therefore, no one sho uld be permitted to take' -'-
the law Into his own hand~ and forCibly eject a per'son in possess ~ on; "

(2) ' whEm ' there· Is a dis puted title, if dispossess.ion by force is permitted,
" { .. ::- r'
'i t wo~ld put the person in prior possession into difficulties. , The e
perso n who enjoys possession must have the benefit o f it until his s
r~gh~ to possession (s leg~lIy challenged;
(3) Itls possible that proving title or ownership, Is more difficul t tha n n
" =.' proving the fact of possessio n, Therefore, if a . person Is forCibly
~\~f'. .. :'"-! ."
't:jected , the per.son in possess ion must no~ enjoy the adva ntage pi

I ', '
,; ';" '""l.~· " ,
. ." ...... ',.! ,"
his act of force . -.
7. Recovery a/speclfic .movable propert/--A person enti\led
,I,
I
to the possession of specific movable property may recover it
;, ",
In the manner 'provided by the Code of CiVi l Proced ure, 1908.
,,
i •
·
I .'
,
'r
Explana~jon 1.-A trustee may sue under this section for
!,;.
1, , the ,possession of movable property to the beneficial interest
t
!
r .,', ,
I J .: :<'. •. in whlC;h the person for whom he is trustee is entitled.
1 .1t •
I

Explanatlo'n 2.-A special.or temporary ~igl1t to the present

! .
f· I"
I, '.
poss'e sslon of movable property is suffiCient to support a su it ,',it
:. :' '.
!. " Ulid.er this s ~ct lon , ,, !
,. . • ,
J
,.
'
/llustrillio ns. - (al A bequeaths lands to B for his life with remainder to i t
I-
).

,
.~~?~~~~~~. ~.
• '. ';0 ; ~ :; .. .. .
C. A dies. 8 enters on the land, but C without S's con.sent, ob ta ins
possession o f the title-deeds. B may ree-over them from C. . (B. U: .,Apr. 81) \ 'i!
rU '
:
I . ~. :'1'.; ... . (b) A ple dge.s certain ·jewels to B to secure a loan. B disposes of them ~m
" ., ' before he is e'ntitl.e.d to do so. A withoul.. having pai d or tendere~ the h.
amount of the loa n, Sl. les B for posse.ssionof the jewels. ~he suit should be b.
dismissed, as A is no\ en titled t.o their possessio'n, wha'tever right he may .ay
I ::. have to secu re their sa fe custody. (B. U.- MtJY . 7~; Mar. 86)
, I
.. .- .'

. ,

..
 rlECOVERING POSSESSION OF PrlOPErlTY 15
-- ' .-.. . -. \ .
"
(c) A . receives .. letter 'addressed to him .by - B. )B . gets.,back ,the letter ; Writs iJ shori not6 S
wi tho~t 'A 's' cO~5;n t. . A has . 5·uch···.a . pr~p~rty tli~relri , ~s . ~ntltl~ . him to on : Restitution of: 5" ~ ~
-- -r ' r~co'V~~.·lt Jiro·in ' iJ~ : - :'J I ~: ', l l' : ~ .:. ~.'j;.. ~ .. \:~ .~: ...~~\~:.: \:.. . :' '~, eMil"". ' .
-, .r
novabJe '
Unaer ~1 ,i
,
;
Cd} A ,depositS rbook5...Mld papa" fe,. sal. cuotgdy wItb B B loses them
~~.lJ, Apt. iIs .
'. 'c 7f Nov. 93 .
• wlthl'; zmd C finds them:' but 'rkfu5es ;to de~lIver : them"' to ''!8 when demanded. B may
. . • ·ro.or of rer.o~ei tbe"'; from C, subject to ,C's rtght, If any, under S. 168 of the
• -4 gup-.l "'!
.. '. e~ty · is ' .....J-
,
Indian Contract ·Poc.!, 1872. , .. '
.
.
.
eel A, a wani!house-keeper. Is charged with the deli"Jery of certain gvod.s
_ ,e "m.ust to Z. which B takes out of A IS ' possession. A may ' sue B for the go.ods!
: ' base,}" S~ 7.
l ul~lied SPECIFIC MOVABLE PROPERTY
ol- the
Section 7 provi des for the recovery of movable' property In specie, i.e.,
, theJthlng Itself. The things to be recovered must be specific In the s~ns;
they are ascertained and capable of Identification. The nature of the things
e$Sory .-i- I . must continue wi thout alte ration . Therefore, the relief cannot be sought for
the ~ecovery of mone~ . Gen erall~, .m one y has no earmark , - - - ~ ~U-j
ordeJ .' PERSON ENTITLED TO POSSESSION .
, take
The person who 'can recover the specific movable property must be one
~s sion '
i , who has a right to the immediate possessio n of such _movable property. It
.1meo, 1 is Immaterial whether his right to ImmedlatlJ possession 15 on the basis of
· The i e ownership 'or otherwise . Ex.,I~lla lion 2 of this . .section makes It clear that a
!II. hi. "'!' . special' 'or temporary right of a person to the pos sessi on of movable property
... i·" .I is sufficient to suppor t a suit u.nd er this section. T,he refore , th,c right under ,
than .' ' I n this section Is not confined to qwners only.

·.
·

;Ie
-.~.

.', '," .£
!

rclb!y.-: I ·Y'

· ,'':'; -. ~f
pl· . r~ )f -
8. Liability 01 person In 'possession, not as owner to deliver
.
to persons en tilled to immooiata possesslon.-Any person having
the ·possession or control of a particular article of movable
itled "'1_ -
:t, <.d
1 property, '0£ which he Is not the owner, may be co;:npelied
, If
- - 2r - .'1 - It·-
.. • _. ' .J -
specifically to deliver it to the person entitled to 'its I mediate
''': " lOB ;: ' I.
. . "- ~p~o;;ss;'e~s~s~i~o~n~,~in~ain~y~~o~.~e~Ro~o~w~n~g~~c~aiseiis~:~=======:~;;~~----~ ~,
- " ,To? >r , e ' .'., ....~~
(a) -when 'the thing clilimQd ;i~ held -by the defendant as the -vr-
• .' rest' st
agent or trustee of the plaintiff;
(b) when compensation In ' money would not afford the ..
:en!
suit
nt
'1,. lit
. " plaintiff adequate relief fOr 'the loss of the thing claimed; --;-(~\ 5t _
(e) when ir ' would be extremely difficult to ascertain the ~~
actual damage caused by .its loss;
(d). when the possession of the .thing cla imed has be.e n
wrongfully transferred from ,the plaintiff.
em
-------------nllilu~s~t~r~a~tl~O"t~l,o~f~cr,la~uT.s~e~(a~·)r--
the
b. A,: proceeding to Europe, ·leaves his furniture In charge o f
lay B, as' his agent during his absence. B, Without As author.ity,
pledges the . furniture to C, and ' C, knowing that B had no

·. I
't' 'veH-- Ov?
. ~,
· ,

· .
 •

~------------~-------------

16 ' THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

"

", rigti{ Yi>",pledge the fu rf.1Jtu!e . ,advertise s it for sale, C may be r ~: °

.-.~
- • :

"" . "j : ,:
co'mpelled to dellver the furniture to A, for he holds it' ~s ' A 's ..... I' _.

"r, '.', ' trustee , ' ( B , U. May 84)

.. " ~ .
',
Illustration of clause (b)
,
.-
•;.
,
~' I' "
Zhas got possession of an idol belongIng to A's famIly, I,
'I and of wh Ich A is the proper custodian, Z may be cQmpelled 1 ...
' to deliver the Idol to A. (8, U. April 73 & Oct, 83 & Ma~ch ! ~
86)
lllu s tra,tlon of claus e (c)
A ' is ,entitled to a plctur~ by a dead painter and a pair of
,
i'
rare ChIna vases, 8 has PQssesslon of them, The articles are i,
of. too specIal a character' ,'to bear an ascertainable market· ~

value, B may be comp elled to d eliver them to A.

Explanatlon.-Un les s and untIl the contrary is proved, the
' Court shall, in r espect '0.1 any article of mova ble 'property
claImed unde r clause (bi-~r: ciause (c) of thi s seetior. , presume,-
(aJ that comp ensation In money would not afford the plaIntiff
ad equate relief for the loss of the thing cla imed . or ' as
the case may be; I
~! j,
" (bJ th,at it would be extremely difficult t:) ascertain the t '
" !
" , , actual.} lam age caused by its loss ,
:' .: Wh.lle Se!=tJon 7 pro vides a relief aga inst w ro llgrul taking up o~ a
.00ovabl,e property. In Sec ti<.... - 8, a remedy Is provided when a person, who
Is not fhe owner retains {he possession of a movable prop erty; the person '
.'
entltle~' to Immediate possession of It may require the perso n In posses sio n
to deliY~r such movable property. '\
I
.. ~ ,. : : ' .' ~n~er this .,sectlon, a p e rson haVing the possession .or control of a :j
., ' ·~:v~ . : "m,?vabh! property of which he Is ~not the owner can be com pelle4 to' dehver
,.;". : ,' ... . : such property to a person entitled to the Immediate posses sion of it under ,
,I
,I
.". . :" the -follOWing ·c irc ums tanccs:- , ,
' .. ;' .. , (I) ' when the thing claimed is held by the defend ant as tHe agent or 4
i.
.. .. . ,trustee , of the plaintiff" or "
i'
",,,'''' ii
.{' (ill compensatio n in money Is not adequate relief to the plaintiff; or
:'
, '(iii) . wher e it is extremely difficult to ascerta in the actual damage caused
' .'<" ~ ; ~Y the' loss; or ii
I;H
(iv) when the possession of ,the thing claimed has been wrongfuUy transferred "

from the plaintiff,

. .. ... ". Generally, whe~ a pe rso n is ·deprived of movable prop er ly or when he i~
I",
"o?; ' Is not deliv~red of a movab le' property to which he Is entitled to, compensation 1:
- ° !l1ay" b~ adequaOte ' reliet 1
.:o~;';" "\~,> , ,: ....
"

-,......,.:',,- _.. _- _. ---_._ _. ..

•
'-
 .....:
, ~"

RECOVERING POSSESSION OF 'PROPERTY' 17

. '. ! f -,'. : ':': ',:./\ ~. : '::. " _ .
Th erefore, ,th,e Court ~ ma'y ; prefe r. tq award .damag'es rather than c9~pel
the deli verY,..of a ...;;peCiric:: ~ovable, .prop~rty. ·.gu(·~when '! the~~lrcumstances
discussed 'above exist:' 'the' Court! :, may ' compel _sp~clflc~liii to dellv,er the
things IIsell, The order :Ulidei 'this ; s~~ti~n"""o'lM! b'~i m~de: 'In'the",case of
rare things' or antics; (Puse'y. :v~ .pus~Yr ; ·The ·' f.a~·ts~·::ln :'this:','case ' were as
follows : . ." 1-:'.. . .. . . ."
The plaintiff was all heir, wh~ sued to recover "a horn with an ' inscription
thereon : That horn was a t~ken of a lamlly for centuriC!s. In this case,
specific relief was granted to deliver the horn to the plaintiff. It will be seen
later that the grounds of relief under this section are the same as In the
case of a suit for specj(jc performance of a contract.

'-

. ,

, '

J ,:
"

SR-l:

..
.--- "" . ' ..
~

. F·f> ...
.. .. .. . '
"':;'O·

.'

,
'.
 -
I !
" , , CHAPTER II I 11 . .-.::
I:!

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE I , ;, ,;" ,

OF CONTRACTS
i ~f~
-'{ -
I,'''':.
(Sees , 9 - '25) , . ,
. ;; !- -
. I" ,).
9, Defences respecting suits for relief b,1sed on con tra c!. -
i. ,:-
.... .: .
.:-:,.:'
.:.: \,,',
Except as otherwise provided herein, where any re lief Is claimed
under this Chapter in respect of a contract, the person against
.,. .:C; '.~

whom the relief is clalrled. may plead by way ' of defence any
ground which is available Iv him under any law relating to contracts ,
Under Englis h Common Law, the only remedy available against a breach
of contract wa s aWclrd of damagl!s to co mpen sate the person aggrieved by
1-
, I'
the breach. Th e Common Law Courts woul d not compel th e defa ulting
party to perform the act which he had agreed to . Grad llally. the Cou rts o f
. Equity acting as Cour ts of .C;:onsc ience exe rCised Jurisdiction over th e person
and began to ~ompel the defendant to sp ecifically p erform the act which he
had cont racted to perform. ih~ Cou rt s o f Equity would not exercise their
jurisdi ction \oI!here the Common Law remedies were adequat~ . So specific • ••••
relief, in Equity, was a remedy available only when a remedy in Co mmon
Law was not ava ilabll:! or was inad eq uate. It will be secn that. in th is
.I Cha p ter, sections incorpora te the same pri nciples of English Law .
This sectio n lays down the gcneral principle that in . a su it for specific
" performance, the defendant can plead all the defences, availa ble to a defclldant
. in a su it for d ama'le s fo r brea~h of contract. For ex ample. al;l se nce of
:::onsldcration, absence oJ' free cons en t o r want of capacity are valid defences
. - ..' .
even in a suit for specific performance. The u nderlying. principle : is that
. unless there is a valid contract, you cannot compel the spec.ific performance
~r it and sim illlrly if there has been 1I valid discharge of a contra c'. there Is
no contract, which can be specifically Emforced .

;j CONTRACTS WHICH CAN BE

" .: .~ . , SPECIFICALLY ENFORCED , r
.. Cases in which specific performance o f contract
10 . :.- :
,
'. ' enforceable. -Except as otherwise provided ' in this Chapter, the
I'
", ' specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of
"
the Court , be enforced
(a) when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual
damage caused by the non-performa nce of the a ct ~d
to be done; or
(b) when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation ,
, in money for its non-per formance would no t afford adequate
i; reli ef.
"" "
'-I-i..• .
'-1.
'-'" C

:~~:'~' ''''''":i·'Jr!P!L'-1 ~ . "'~'-'

.. - ,. . .
~.-
" -
/ I
I
-'

I SPECIRC PERF.<?~!'1AJ:l~E 0.F CO.NTRACTSI Y

'I ..
.'.',' . \ ..... _..~.;+,: ~~ \/I . ~ .. ":
:'N " .
:......~
r ii. E;xplanat[pn. :-:-Unless
_. . • ,"'
. anp.::unt!l ..,...t.h~
. . . 1 ... ~ .. , •• I . •
.. ~.':mtrary •..•••Is, 1". proy,ed,
. .. .. . . " ... '."
....the
" .1-
Court ·shall · presurrie":"':·· :""' ;'"":;',';..'" ::. .1. ' . '....

'l
..

. (i) that the1freach ~f':a ,co~ttl!.ct to tra~sfer Immcivaqle property

Discuss th~
drcumst4nc~s
cannot be . adeqii'atei;:;"ielieved 'by 'compensation In money; wher~ln Ih~ " $pj-:,
and .. :! .:,: ~'.': ;' .r.j .:·~ It ",. ,:. :, .. ';',"-: . cific perform4nce
.. of ;, conlrllCt c.!1}

.r
L (il) that the breach of a contract to tra,ri'sfer movable property
can be so relieved except ...-.:.- In . the following cases:
. .
b. enforc«l. Enu-
me(iJte Ih~ ~ot'l­
ir4C( whlch c.!nnot
(a) where the property 'Is neit an ordinary article of b .. . . specifi'74/1y
comrrierce, or I; of special value or Interest to the enforced.
B.U. 0<1. 84
plalnttff, or consists of goods which are not easily
, obtainable in the market; In Wh4t cilsa t:4n
II Court gr.mf spe·
(Ii) where the property Is held by the defendant as the
cific pRrlo ;n i.;nce
agent or trustee of the plllintlff. of lI--€Dn t rhct to

Illustrations to clause (a) trllnsler_ ,!IoIl4ble

profX'rty ?
A agr~cs to buy, and B agrees ,to sell, a ~icture by a dead paint.cr and B.U. Oct. 84
two rare 6hina vases. A may comp"el B specifically to perform this contract Oct. 86
for there is no standard for ascertaining th e actual damage which would be
caused by its non-performance. (B. U. May 79, March 86)
A cont racts with B to sell to him a house for Rs . 1,OqO. B is entitled
to a decree directing A to convey the house to him, he paying the 'purchase-
., mQney .
,
In consideration of being released from certain obligations Imposed on
it by its Act of Incorporation, a railway company contracts with Z to make
an 'archway through its railway to ,connect lands of Z severed by the .
railway, to construct a road between certain speCified pOints, to pay a
certain annual .sum towards ·the maintenance of ' this roa-d . . and also to
construct a siding and a wharf as specified in the contract. Z is entitled to
have thiS contract speclfi cally~ enforced, for his interest in Its performance
cannot be adequately compensated for by moneYi Al1d the Court may .appoint
a' proper person to superirit~~a the construction of the archway. road;
siding and wharf.
A contracts to sell, and. B contracts to buy. certain number of railway
shares of a particular description. A refuses to c~mplete the sale, B may
compel A specifically to perforf!! this agreement, for the .shares are limited
in ,nu'1'lber and not always to be · had in the market, and the possession
<.:arries with it the status of a shareholder , which cannot otherwise be
procured . . .
a
A contri'\cts with B to paint picture for 8, who agrees to p"y therefor
Hs, 1,000. The picture is pai nted . B is entitled to have it delive r ed to him
on payment or tend~r 01 the Rs . 1,000. (B. U. May 76,'.
/', . A transfers without endorsement, but for valuable consideration, a promissory
!, note ; to 8 , A becomes insolvent, and C. is appointed his assignee. B may
i compel C to endorse the note, for C has succeeded to A's liabilities and a
i,,

.. ,
., ~ .,
.".-

\.\
 ...
(- -

",.- \
20 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

,decree for pecuniary compen~a.tion for not endorsing the note would be
fruitless.
I ! .
1- . /
"

'.
~;

- I
~ ~

~ ;..-
.fxiJ.1JJ!~! ;.· ;~: . tiff"
:pro~!sjqP'! .O/ l ~W,
, . -'''''ith , rftg.ud to ihfl,
j gr".nt!n.g :.:p( "-,, fJ .
spec;fic p.r(or,':".
I PeCifiC performance of 8 contract.
I •-
This- section and S . 11 provide for specific performance of a contract
In,certain cases . The speci fic performance of a contract is at the discreOon
lr •
of the Court.. No person ca n cla im ' It as of right. This section states the
cirqJmstances under which the Court may exercise its discretion to enforce' 1 ..

'I I
flltJllce '
conirdct.
of ' · ,;

'" ~.~)... ~pr. 83,\

j The ' general erinciples regarding specific performance of a contract may
e noted: I, .;
' (i) Specific performance will not be granted where damages are an
D(l!eqr!.~nls· . .~er8
'.
,I 0llln." 01 cOdl
m{t!e~ _ iJ!\c( ~ tl!.,!rl!<!
, - adequate remedy , ' ,
(iI) To grant a specific performance of a contract is at the discretion of ,
WiJs . iJ(J iJgrum.n1 the Court.
i u,;'t~ ..tq~ 'ff4,intif(;,'
that they would . (iii) The plaintiff must prove the following ,
i
" giv...·. . .:; {p~m.. ::::~·· Cal that there was a concluded and valid contract between himself
. stMding ~if:r~nc.eq. and the defen~ant; ·-
. 0/ !l~: .5, 1~Cf:: (or ,5 (b) that he had performed or was ready and willing to perform
·Y~ . O:n, COn</f-bo,n
th.1 tho PLoin·lill, the terms 'of the ' contract on his pari ;
w•• to .ppo-int II {c} tha t he was ready and willing to do all matters and things on
M4n4g.r "nd ,,/so hi ~ part the reafter to be done,
4Ssisf -with their '
,: ,,,/vic. tJnd 'ih;,j ,The ' expl;.anatlon to this section lays' d:>wn c~rtain rules of interpretation
I
I, Sdles wer. to b• . to' this section , It lays down certain presumptions that t"he Court has to
" 'nt)(i;z jointly by ma,ke. The , presumptions ,can be summed up as mentioned below, But it
PLolnliff, .no DBI.-;. , rtI~st , be' noted Jhat these are r~-buttable presumptions, The defendant can
ncltlnis, _Th. De/~ ' prove' that the~e pr~sumptlons are not applicable in particular cases . ' i·
ne/dnls /J{ter som. Trye presumptions are :
,
tim(l would · lJot
pin with tho co.! ', I (arl;:;" ~ contract of transfer or immovable property, compensation , in
for u/.s. Advic. "· ' : money is ' not adequate relief,
PLJklti{fs,
'(b) In a contract to transfer movable property, compensation in money
S.U. Oct. '85
is adequate ~elief unless-
(i) the property is not an ordinary article of commerce or i s of, a
., special value or Interest to the plaintiff or consists of goods

·1
1 which are not e,aslly 9btainable in the market; or
• (Ii) the property Is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee
i of the plaintiff.

.,;1' 'Ordinarily the Courts arc entlt!ed to presume that, in case of breach of
contract to transfer Immovable property, mere compensation is not adequate
J " - /
. 'I reJief and the specific performance is so; while in the case of movables,
11 compensation is the ordinary r~lief and specific performance is exceptional.

J . -' ..
Cuodee v. Ruller (24 E.R. ' 521) is the leading case on the point that,
as a general rule, agreements relating to the sale or purchase of personal
chattels will not be speCifically enfoq:::ed. for damages at 101'\"" would afford
an adequate compeosation for the breach thereof. Where, however, dama9cs
would not afford an adequate compen'sation, specific pedor mance may be
1
!
:f
'\ r>
i, - c
,! •.
, ","f'""""J"'!I!..
j ... .
.i ..

-/
 Ii '~' .. , r
. ~,

!
' f:. ~.
" SPECIFIC PE.R~ORMAN¢.EP.~~PNTRACTS
r~
. . decre~d as in 'the' cas'e '6L:agre'e '~ent5 ' r~r ~h_~\s~l~ 'of-' .~. ;~j~:~~:'l;j" "~,;",i
.
i' j '" -: . ,

-. ~ . .f: .: .{~; ~~~;~;~:~a~:;~:~:*;~~r17;~!;~;~~~,\~~::~<"';~ ';tX: ;,:~.;:~;~.:~>:

Ip c'ase~ v.:here ' lmmovabfe properly Is ' c6'ricern~:ct ' It in~Y · re~'soWably' b~
.:~.... I.; \
' -!~M~\"
.~ ~'\~I
• c"ontended that so f3r 'as;' th'e vendor Is con~erned, da~ages would be'
.. i $'uHicient rem edy for tl-e" breach ,<jf a contract for the sale of land';" n';"ei1h~less •
.... equity will spe'cifically enforce ' lt on .hls application j l'st as muc;:n 'is "on th e
.,' :.. , ~.
. ,~. " . '-.
i. application of the purchaser: Tile basis on which the vendor o(lmmovable
I
-I property is ' he'ld entitled to enforce specific p ed ormance against the buyer
of a contract (or sale of the property is the doctrine of /Smutua/ity ". If th e .'. ~ ':'
vendo r of property Is compellable (0 perform his contract, he must also be ....."
-I entitled to come to the Court to get it .speclfically enforced as against th e .... . :
buyer. The Co urt will not Interfere in favour of one party and not of the
-1 other.
..
' ': ,
. .... :
To put It briefly, the common law is that money Is th e measure of ,'.
every loss; but in the case of land, da~ages afford no true co mpensation .....
a~d do not attain the desirea object .\l{hich they do in case of mo vables ;
he.n ce the jurisdiction exercised _by a Court of Equity in the first case. The ....:
exceptional cases Me where breach of ~ contract fo r the trans fer of immovable
property can be adequately compensated . . J

Raj 1<. UchTd v. An/ali Bhandari, lAIR (1981) Deihl 2371

It was 'held that a stranger to the contract cannot be impleaded in a
suit for specific perfor~ance of a co ntract of sale of a house as this will
alter the very nature of the suit.
'. '.
Obligation annexed to the own~rship of property
The concept and creation of dua lity of ownersh ip, lega l and equitable,
on the execution of an agreement ·to convey Immovable property. as unders tood
-, In England is alien to Indian Law which recognises one owner, i.e . , the
.1
-lega l owner: Many o f. the 'pr1z:1,c lples of Eng lish Equity however have ta ken
statutory form In . Indl~ and have been IAcorporate-d in occasional provisions
of 'va ri ous Indian statutes such as the Indian Trusts Act, the Specific Re lief
. Act, Tra nsfer of Prop';rty Act, etc.
- It,ls clear (rom the ultimate para of Section 54 and the ultimate and
penultimat e paras of Section 40 of the T.P . Act that a contrac t for the sale
of Immovable property though does not, ' of itself, create any in te rest In or
. charge on such property create.s an obligatio n annexo!d to the ownership of
Immovable property, not amounting to an inte rest In the proper ty, but
I'
,
;.
r which obligation may be enforc ed aga inst a transfeo ree with notice of the -
contr"ct or a gralllitous transreree of the -proper r.y. ThLis the Equita ble
I ownersh ip In property recognised by - Equity In En31and Is trans lated into
Indian Law a.s an obligation annexed to the owne rship of property. not
amou nti ng to an interest In th e property. but an obligation which may be
enforced against a transferee with notice or a gratuitous transfe ree. '(Bd;
posa b. i v. U.lhurdas Govindas, A .I.R. 1980 S.C. 1334)
Provisions regarding the cases in which specific performance of contract
was en forceable we re co nta ined in ·5 . 12 o f th e Old Ac t bu t no w they are

--

.
-'
 " ,.

22 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

"
,.'

I '"
. \
,: ." \ '
. laid down in Ss, 10 and 11. Th'e "explanation ·to S . 10 has· been · made more
' explanatpry than the corresponding expl;,natlon to S. 12 of the Old Act. In
view of the vast ~conomic developments which are taking place In !ndla.-It
.,
. .
.
"

:1\f.~
'-

~~ provl.ded that in certain cases where there Is a .contrad for supply of

. Tflovab,e pr.o perty there shall be a presumption .that compensation In money
wo~lq (lot afford the plaintiff. adequate relief for the 10" of thing, claimed ,
.Thls provision Is· based on similar ru les developed in the United States. The
"The power of the
Courts In the United States have enforced specific-: performance of contracts
co urt in gr.snllng ·
the decree for i~ ' fu~ish gas, water or other necessary materials to a marlufach.Jring establishment
spgcific ' pflrfor- wher-e the thing contraded for is not Immediately avall.~ble from other
J1),JnCfl Is disc,.- ~ources a~d a breach of the cO'ntr"ct would stop the operations of the
tion.JrY: .. Discuss. plaintiff's ~stabllshment. The same princlp,le Is applied where the goods are
B.U. May 91 such that they can be supplied by no one except the defendant.
RELIEF UNDER S. 10 IS DISCRETIONARY
It Is not imperative upon a Court to decree specific p~rformance of a
.....

ii
cO'l!ract merely b~cause - the case falls within Section 10 even then as the

I
'.:'.
_s~ction s~y;it -may · se -· gra.rltea at the discretion of the Courtj SectiOJl 20
should be read with Section 10. Section 20 provide, : "The jurl~diction to
I decree specific performance is discretionary and the Court is no t bo und to
I grant such 'relief merely b~cause it is lawful to do so but the discretion of

I,
..' :
I the Court Is not arbitrary bu.t sound and reasonable guided by judicial
! . ." . principles and capable of correction by a Court of appeal."
.';':. .11. Cases in which specific performance of contracts connected
,' .. .. ,' with trusts enforceable. -@ Except as otherwise provided ie:
• '.' >;"

this Act, specific performance of a contract may, in !he discretion 1I --:

,,i,; .of ' the Court, qe enforced when the act agreed to be done Is in
- c
,
the performance wholly of partly of a trust. : 't'o .
'"
"
..' (2) 'A' contr.a ct made by a trustee' in excess of his powers or
·In breach .~f trust cannot be speclf(cally enfo;ced.
Und~r this section, ·It Is provided that If the contract in question crei1 tes
. an obligation in the nature of a trust , the specific performance of such
contract may be. enforced. The' requirement for the application of this
'-: section is that the relief· claimed must partake of the nature of bo th the
,
specific performance of a c~ntract and the enforcement of 'an obligation in
! the nature of a tru,t. For example, In Ch.llok v. Muller, 8 CH. D, 177, the
/.,
,i I
facts were as under :
The plaintiff .lgreed not to compete with the defendant in the pu rchJse

l'" , of a certain property. In turn, the defendant promised the plaintiff that he
would · convey part of, such prop,erty to the plaintiff. In this case, specific
performance of. the contract was allowed and It was observed that the ".
,
'
,.;
f
•
.
I ~, ·defendant must be deemed to be a trustee for the plai ntiff.
' ~"" '.\ " U~der sub-section (2), it is provided that the Court c·annot specifically
"
!.
I enforce a contract made by a trustee In ex.cess o f his powers
of ·trust. .
o~ in brea ch

i
l -, - "-'-:' ~J"r }f':t\ffllJlVl-"". J
,.
."t1
:

~
" -~. ~
-'
"': -
 ~r

,I
. .' ~. l .

" \ ....
':,;;.
., ' .
,SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CO'NTAACTS
. . ". .~ ..... ~

" ;:112YSp'eclhi:}JeHorrf1!an~e of;1rt OICd;;~rad.~ ; (~j:¥.x~ibt~;

"

<
'Wh~ ·an Specific .. :. .-

.
>
oth\iiWlse:'i ~ereih~fier" pfoyi~ed ' in" ihls •secflon: ' th~ : ~q,ulJ~~Qall
riot'<ll~ed ~h~. ~pec!flc lperfonnance of a partoi~J?6.rt;att>~{ ,' . "diinl'ed? Mlo .:ail":
f/!/:ft:;';;JJ-,
~
• '. , it' j ... .. . .' ? '
"" '· '(2} \vh~h" !;~.• 1 ~rt " t8 " a.cont~attls ~ Ie :t6>p~ff¢f;,{ th~ 'daim B.U,
.,

Oct, 90 ,
1
• I ~h~le ' of his wt of it. hut the part ' ,!hich must be left ~nperotm.' ~ ,
bears only a small proportion to the whole In Vaill" anQ,,6limtfs .:,' .
, of compensation in money the Coudiriay. at the 'sUli' of. either ' ...•...
· .
party, dire~tthe speclfi~ p~rforn1arick Of so much)j.Uhe cOntr<i-c:t , '
~ . • . ~ .. ' . . I _'
as can be performed, ,' aha award compensatiori : 1tl.:.rI10ney :eelr ," , "
the defiCiency, ' '.' -"'~', ','; :' ~>; :
ow . • ,' -t "'1 ~;~" , .po

, (3) Where a party to a contract Is unable to , 'Petrorrtl '.th~

whole of his part of it, and the part which must be left u~pe?'f~r;;,ed
elther- ' , , , ,'
(a) forms a conslderabl¢B~t( elf th~ whole;dhough ' ~diriltt!o9
- . .t .,. • . , .. , _." , " .r.. . ... . .. . .'
'~ '"

of compensanooln money; or : " , ' , "," '"

, (b) does " not ,, ~Jirijt " ~ftortip~h~'~tio~ in money, He ' i~ ' ~ot
,entitled to'obtai~a ' dect~~ -iorsjJecifi~' ~errorrriarice,i but k~ r~gd'rding spe-
'&pldin fully rn'e

II the ~o\lrt ~y:; ':-~:Hi1~; ~uli of

the other 'pa'~t~: ~df/e~t'}h;" clfic perfornu,nce
party · in ! default ,to pedorro~peCifically so Tnc;ch of · his · of a pM! 01 A

~- "TO!
J part of the contract as h~ cari perform, if the other contrLlct.
party,-
(I) in a case falli~g underdause (a) i:;;~~~ tir hils paid
the agreed cOhslq,erat[ori for .th~ whole :b.! the contra~t
B.U, Mar, 93

reduced by th.e ~b;;:side~atior1fo; th~ part y"hlch must

.-- be left unp~ri~rr;;ed and, in ~ cas,r? fal il ng: un<:ler
clause(il) r.iays<\r i hi!~' paid lhe co~sideran6)i'ib~ the
· ' . whol~/)fihe ' ~oiif[~ti wifhbut any::~liate'meoJ; and,
. . ".. -._ ." .~ - , "~" . ..i ·, '~/.,_, ·· _ .~: ::,": ._. ;" . '.' .;,.... -. ' , . .
.In. eltne(.c~s~;
(ii). -,. ..
relinq~l~heJ
,.. .. . .
. .. - .
.'~ .
<;Ill claims to the
. ,." performa,.f:\Ce
..
" of tfie ,req,a(ning p"rt : ofthe contracts arid alL, rIghts
" ., <: ,J? t'oi-ti~~tis~t!bri ;' e11h~r for the deficieiity 6r. rdr t~~
.' lbss or damage, sustained by him throUgh the d~ rau lt
of the defendant. ' . ,.-' .
, (4) When a . part 'of , ~ ' contra-ct which, taR~n by itself, cun
and 'ought ' to be ~pecliically ~erf~rmed, stands on a separate
and Indepcmderit footing from another part or' the sa'me conlract
. which can riot or ought not to be specifically performed, the
COl!l't may direct specific ,performance of the former part .
. Explanation.-For the pu ;pose~ ', of this section, a party to a
contract shall be deemed to be unable to perforlll the wh ole of
--j
·.
:
- , ~ . ,.....-.
-:. ·~;;b~·:" u,.·
.... . , - ~ ..

-<

i
!
\.
ll..

l
 ,
; ~ ' 24 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT
....' ,'" ,:'...'
" :-
his part of It if a portion of Its subject-matter exlotlng at the
date of the contract has ceased to exist at the time of- its
performance.
Se~tlons ' 10 and 11 deal with
agreed to be performe in a particu ar contract. n rules are
. not direct th. spe· "provided for ' performance of a part of a cOilli act wile .. tile who le of it
" cific. .performanc(I '",' fannot be enforced. .
"
of . ,, ' pari 01 As a rule, the Court cannot direct the specific performance of a part 0;
contract. .. .3 cqntractj be~ause . a contract is presumed to be entire .,r.lld m~st be
"
S.U . .Nov. 82 '. performed as one and whole._ Nevertheless, there arc certain exceptional
Writs a short
·s "'I
not. a .
circu mstances under which the Court may enforce the specific pe rformance
,.
I
on . poe "c
INrform.wc~ 01 4
' of
h
part of. a contract. The main":conslderation hert: Is whether the part
. b' 'f f . ,
t at Is to e fe t unper ol.',ed· Is sm.1!11 or .considetably large. If the part
p,rt o/a conrfr. ct, ' w~I~I~ mus! , b~ ,left unpt!lformcd Is only" smnl! proportion to the
......... 8 U. Nov 83 \ whole contract In value and admits of compensation in mo ney . the Court
Oc . 8~m ay • .at its disc retion. direct th e specific performance of the part of the
AP~' 90 contract and a~ard compensation in money for the p~rt that. cannot be
Mll 91 performed. ; '. ,. , ,.. .. . . '
~1ay ' , .
, ~ ',, ' " Illustrations
:.t " ~':''':'' :~;' ' ~ ' : ',~-
(a) A cOfltracts to sell B a . piece o f land consisting of 100 bighas. It
;, turns out that 98 bighas 'of the land belong to A , and the two remaining
::: :.~ ;.' ....\. .. :bl.g·h~s to_ a .strange r •. who ~efu~e'd to part with ·them. The 2 bighas are not
i' i
I
". ;,.:.;. ':'. '<.: . .
"nec,:ssarY.· fdr ·.the use or enjoymen t of the 98 bighasJl.o.~ so important for
! W{ite a short noi. ¥se. o·r eJ.ljoymer:'t that the loss ' of tl)em may not be made good in money, A
i i on Sp~cific ' .. . .
1', I poirfo~;n4;'ce o( .~ ' may be··directed at the suit of B conyey to B the 98 ·: bighas and to make
U;' .,
I
I,
contract in GUilt . . o( ,. compensation
. to . him for no t conveying' the tw~ remaining 'bighasi or R may
'Part performiJn~~:" be di.r'e cted. ~t the ' suit of A, to 'pay out of receiving the conveyance and ,.
,i .... :;-. .
t
I
S.u. May·.S7 . . . poss~slon of
the land, the stipulated purchase·~~ neYI less 'a su'm awarded
,i . as :c'ompensation for the defici~mcy, 1· .. ' : :

t.
I· _' (h) In a contract for ~he sale anq purchase of a house and lands, for 2
. -.-
i
Jakhs of rupees it Is agreed that part of the .furniture should be taken at a
',I valuatl"on. The Court may direct ,specific performance of the contract
, ,
! ;. notwithstanding the parties are unable to agreE: as to the valuation of the
furniture and 'may eithe r have furniture valued in the suit and included it in)
.
" ",
~.~ .

the decree for specific performance o r may confine its decree to the hous o/.
,.
~ :-;.
, rata Industrial Bank, Ltd. v. Rustomje~, (1920) 22 S;m., L,R, 489,~ ,:
l-
'.-The facts of the ' case a re as under;- ' "
Defenda'nts offered to s'ell to plaintiffs their property situate~ at Meadows ,.
Slreet:' !'lombay, for Rs. 7,41,000. Plaintiff; accepted the offer an'd paid Rs,
f 25,000, by \V~y of e'a rnest money. ' Subs·e quen.t1y, it ~as found that the area
of' the land .mounted to' 1,281 sq ; yard, arid not'1:482 sq. yds . as stated
L, in' · th·~ letter of offer. Plaintiffs informed defenda~ts ' that they had agreed to
p'urC:h~s .e the property on the representation that. it comprised 1,482 sq.
;
yds. and the pu rchase·price was ca"culated on that area and If the land
'. . measured 1.281 sq ,' yds. they were no longer bound l;Iy th'!!ir,:-ayreement to
I
p'urchase as the discrepancy In area was so g:-eat , as to entitle them to
,,'

' ;. ..,:~....:
-.....r~ " I.:· .t.: i'i'tl~''' ' f.' .: ·!t!5·f
. ~.!-
. i ~ -"
 !

, II ..;.,
I it",·
I
. :,~'~\~ i .
'.' • " SPE~:7~: p!'Rr~~MANCE ; QF C'CONTHA:TS 25 .,
1e . '::., :.. t;efuse'. to .•c;my .ou!j.h~ ,'.gr~emen.t: . ~ybsequ~nt.ly, " the .. plalntiffs Informed .the .
, ts
.:!
~ ,'. · ...deferidants ,iliat:tI1eYAes.lied)o c,ornpliielh. ;pureh.se .obJecno a proportion.ie .
! ,:.d~ctloii in"the : pLirC":';s~;moneir The·'pl.lntiffs -thereupon sued · the defend.nts
,
. "'!. -
'.
for :spedilc performance 6f 'th~ "coritiactwithccimpensation of RSi·1 ,Iakh '
,ct
lor 'the d~lIciency '~of 201 ,-sq. 'yo •. H~ld. ·dlsmlsslng the' sult- .. .'
re
• , 'It (1)' That th'~ 'del"ndari~ were not u;'able'lo 'perform the whole '01 their
as'
contrAd the ,property' wa~ described ' in every "posslble and co~eivable
, man~'er . ~~ the property et Meadows Street.
of
be . (2) That even '. If ther~ ' had ' been failure on the part of defendants to
,.1 perform the whC;;'e of their part of the contract, 'the plaintiffs were
,
:e not under Section 14 or-the Spedfic Relief Act, enUtled to compensation
ITt in money for "the le fl cie ncy, b ecause the part left unperformed was
ITt one-seventh in area of the ' whole of the prope,rty.
Ie (3) That the plaintiffs were entitled to specific performance under Section
Irt 15 of the Act only upon relinquishing all claims to further performance
1e and all rights to' compensation either for the deficiency or for loss
,e or. damages sustained b'y 'them through the default of the defenda .nts.
WHERE PART OF CONTRACT UNPERFORMED
IS CONSIDERABLY LARGE I~C~..) - r

It 5Uc~~
When ·the part of the contract which cannot be performed is considerably . ,- _
Ig large, the party who ·is u~able to .perform It in 'Yl:lOlc Ga~HlP:lh oht.,i. p a· ~~~,
ot d.!cree f~r specific performance in the following circllmstances: /
"A (1) the part, he Is unable to perform, is considerably larg e, even though
it admits of compensation~ In money.
.
t
,e
,y ,~ (2) such R~rt d~~ not admit £..Lc:.ompensatlon in money. Nevertheless,
;d at the suit of the other. party, ~he ·.part-performa·nce of contract can be
, "
:d - specifically enforced if such other party ha s paid the agreed consideration
for 'the whole of 'the contract withoi..lt any 'abat"ement and relinquishes all
claims to t~e performance of the remain;n ar f the contract as well as
2 i'
.' . al rig ts a comp.en~ation cir the deficiency or for damages .
~
•
:t
. i Illus/ra/lons
,e
ij
::1 (a) A contracts ;~ ~' c{ to B a piece of. land consisting or- 100 bighas. It
n . ~I ~ . turns out that 50 blghas of the land . belong to A and the other 50 bighas
1. to a stranger . . . . ho · refused to part . with th~m . A cannot obtain a decree
agaln~t B for the specific performance of the contract but if B is wi lling to
pay· tf)e price agreE;d upon ; and to . take the 50 bighas whi~h belong to A,
. waiving all right to compensation"· eith~r · for the' defiCiency at for loss
s
sustained by him through A's negl~ct or default, B is entitlea to a decree
directing .4 to convey those 50 big has to him on payment of the purchase-
money,
(b) A contra~ts to sell to B an estate with a house and garden for a
lakh of rupees. The garden is Important for the e njoyment or lhe housc , It
I·
d: turns ;Oyt that A is . unable to convey the garden . A cannot obtain a decree
)
agaln"st B for the specific performance of the contract but if B is Willing to
)
pay the price agreed upon, and to take the estate and house withou t the
garden, ,""aiving all right to compensatio n either for the defiCiency or for
' ..
,, i
'.~. '/
"
,~
,
II"
'
"\

h~~"'"
..
," .

..
 t- . _L '

26 THE SPECIFIC RELI EF ACT

loss sustllined by him thro4gh A's neglect or default, B is entitled to a

decree directing A to conv~y the - house to him on payment 01 the purchase~.
money. (8. U. Apr.J980) ,
:~
Principle
This clause 1$ based on the simple pririciple " ~hat. a mere difference In
quantity 'shall never be held to be a bar to specific performance. The Court
of Chancery always drew a distinction b-e twecn the es!: '~ntlal and non·
essential terms to be made the 5ubj.~ct of compen's ation. In a Bombay case,
where' the vendor had contracted to sell (our plots of la~ without apportionment
of "the price of each ' plot,. and it was found that the v~ndor was unable to .
carry out tho contro!lct rcgiHdlng on~ out of (our plots. which was :lcld to ·
lorm a con~lderable portion , of the wholc dnd not a small portion , it was
"
held that t~e pur~haser was ~ntltled to rcl ~cf only on ~is agrc::!ing to buy
the remaining ' property lor the stipulated price, (Hirdlal v, JanarddIJ, 39
Born. l.R. 1299) .
.2 EP~RA.1! A.!'D INDEPENDENT PART
. Sub-section (4) of 'this section provides that if a pa rt that cannoi be
~pecilicaJly performed and the other part which can be specific ally perfo rmed
stand on separate and Ind~pendent footings, th~ C o urt 'may direct the
performance of that Independent and separate part which c an be specifically
enf.orced, ' ~l
~tjls !'ub:~,ectIOt1 is aP'P\icable If the following conditions are f4lfilled : I,
,-, ;
, " ,

.'
(i) the p~rts of ti,e cont;act are divisible;
(II) af)d further the part' U~~t can be specifically enforced is independent
and separate from the other part.
n
qr'"
, Whether .'a ' ~ontract 15 ,divisible or not must depend upon part i.::ular
cir~umsta'nce$ of ' ea~h casc, the terms of the contract, and nature of the'
prCijOirty. The following are the instances where the contract has been held
to b. divisible, ' .
-I t.\:.·
. I '- - .

-1+
-..
'I. Wher.e the contracl Is in ~.any manner alternative, so that the parts of ' {~ ~
", ~ It , are CDutually exclusive one oJ the other; and the plaintiff has a .right to -
as~ for th~ per{ormance of one part, the Court may treat this as indepe ndent -- !
of the ot(ier (Green v. L~w, 2 Be.v. 925). --t'
2 . Wlien , ~n agcl}t , witho'ut authority contri"cted to sell to the pl"' intiff \
i{
the shares of five co-sharers, three of whom, raqfied the contract and the o
others refused and it was clear that each party treated, his share as separa,te
an.d distinct, It 'wa s, held th,a t there was no impediment in Jaw to a decree
being gran'ted, to .',the plaintiff In respect of the shares of such of the co·
j. . sharers who,' ;atffied, the agent's contract, becausc after ratification, the
i contract wa's ,dlv;id:ed 'and a se'pal'ate concluded contract was made in regard
to lhe share'~ oUhe· ratifying co·sharers. (Harendrd v. Nandalal, A.I.R. 1933

". C.I~. R/cihts ol.-pu~, 1es5ee--.?J£ainst person with no

01

tit/~ imperfer;Ll!!!!.-(lj Where a person contracts tosell or

let certain ··immovable property having no title or only an imperfect

-I
-I
!
-I
•
!l
,
 •
'
@
"

',' '- SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE ' OFCONTRACfS

.
'ii;id'
.
i' \~~~u~~h~idr'
-.
~~".I~;~~~~'d'~GJ~c(;~the'
. .;; ......':.i.:'. ,
;~tii'~i' provl~i6ts
-,",'e:'
'of
..: .
:',1( ', [. 1 ;~ '-.' : :~ ~,·. :, 'lo·. ;.
this ' Chapter) has the :folloWing rlgh!s;namely ': ,,' . ,. '
. . " :; .... , ., ' ii ', . • : -" ""' -' CI. : J'." . " J -" ';':':fi Jl.t ·t · .• q ": ",1 t,. ... · i : ._·; ·: ·P~. ~:: '~ "
, ' (a)fCthE! ,~endor 9( ,lessoi;iPa,sj subsequentIYJd)hecontract
.• :e fn
.' acqulred,;!anylnte.resLln :the' -'pr.operty" the r. purcha~er or What lUll III •
I~ssee ', n;;~y co~p~[ hl~ io
make good ihe' co~tracrout . 'rlgll Is 01 II - pur-
ch4ser 01 an im'"
,-:'our t of such" interest; mCvabhl properly
non .. (b) where the concurrence ~f other persons is necessary for .g4inst the vendor
:ase ,
validating the tl.t1e, .~nd they· are bound to concu,r at the with no title or
me'lt only IJ imperfect
Ie to request of the vendor or lessor, the purchaser or lessee title?
'd 10 ' may .compel him to procure such concurrence, and, when B.U. Oel, 87
wa,s.; a ~onveyance by other persons is necessary to validate Oct. 92
buy . Mar. 93
the title and they are bou'nd. to convey at the request of May 94
39
the vendor or lessor, the purchaser or lessee may compel _.,. ,
i f
him to procure such conveyance; ' f.ui""i#,c:vr ~fvh en coo ~he
be ( ~
,,
(c) where the ·vendor professes to sell unencumbered property, vendor ,or lessor
but the property Is mortgaged · for an amount not exceeding be <did to heve no
.11ed
. title or imper/eCI
the the pu rchase-money and the vendor has in fact , only a title to the im.
:.111' rlght to rlcfe';irr~lft, the purchaser may compel him to mov.ble property?
redeem the mortgage and to obtain a 'valid discharge, - kom ./-\-'I-L 1E!S4 e..e...,
. . . f(.."",1J,; . Wh", rights li nd
-~ ~
and where necessary. also a conveyance f~orn the mortgageej remedit!! iJre /Jvai.
.. ent : r;,/
, ,1
(d) wher~ the vendor or lessor sues for specific performance I"ble to the pur-
ehllScr or I he
;: ". - . . of the contract and the suit Is dismissed on the ground lessee "9dinsl Ihe
, "

• _ lIar _;-..~ -~ i
of his Wilnt of title or ImperfeCt title ; the defendant has vendor or Ihe
': • :he' , . , i i a right to a return of his d~poslt, if any;, with Interest Ii!Hor h"vi.Jg no
litle or imper/ecl
- - ' eld ' . j' l thereon, . to his costs 01 the sun, and to a ItnJ'F such title 10 Ihe immo- .
. · /" I d~posit, lot~st and costs .·on the interest, lra;Jy, of the v"ble property ?
.' , _ . j i
-of ..i ' ~ v.endor or lessor in tHe property which is the subject, , B.U. M.y 84

. '
to
!nt .
matter ·of the ' cc·ntract. · ,.: _ ' X IJgreed 10 gr"nl
(2) The' proviSions of sub-s~'ftion (1) shall illsv apply,' as far

41
Iusil 10 }' lor 10
yurs from ·1965.
ill as may be, to contracts ' for 'the ' sale or hire of movable property. believing /hlJt - IJ
Ie , Th(l: principle in
Clause l(c) of this -~ection is comp~rable ,to :the"princlples prior lelJse in
te i , underlying In Section 43 of the Transfer of Property A~ t. The ' points of f.!Vour "of A hdd

,-'e
,. c
"
d ifference betwe en this section and S.ection 43 of the Transfer of Property been lerminlJted by
forfeiture. A '5 le- ·
,f Act may be noted. Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act Is ba sed 6n
"se w""s however
Ie ' the doctri ne of ~/eeding the gamt by estopper and also on th e maxim of
'd proved 10 be leg-
equity' that "'equity treats that as done. which ought to have been dope. "
'3 IJIIy subSisting till
Therefore, under Section 43, at .the option ·of the transfe ree, the Interest
, T acqulr~d by the· transferor vests ·In· th·e tran sferee. But under .this section,
1960.
, 0 the tra'nsferee can speCifically enforce the co~tract; the title does not.. automatically
~ . flied "
dgdinst X for spc'
suit

vest in him.' . , olic perloTIJldnce.

r
Under Section 43 of the Trilnsfer ' of Property Act, a fraudulent or Will )' SfICC ..·cd ?
.!--"
'I '. t B.lI. 001. 8'S

"
.'
.~

" i:<: - '" -:"" - -- ..-.

.. -, '""" :: " - " •
"
, .. 1- ,' ,
' --
, "

i
I
I,.
f

b
 .'

'. . ~. ',,, .
28 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

".;.-
.~ ,' Y~ " , '\ ........ ; \I,.~':'
'. " ".~. . k,',' ::. -' ,'" " ': ',
" _ . :_. \ ~:.~;) h~.,
erroneous represe n tatlor:! ' by the trans feror is ne-;cssary whereas under this
ri
. ,section sU,ch representation is ' not r elevant.
Under .Sectio n 43 of the Tr.ansfer of Property Act, the doctrine Is
appli~able only in the case 'of immovab le property whe reas the' rule under
this section is ~ppl icabl e to both movable and Immovable proper,tie s.
.i f·/ I :-
I· . .
. Th .: IUle under Section 43 of the T.P. Act 15 ap plicable to all kinds o{
transfers w hile under this section it is applicable only in the case o f a sale
1-
:f: :,',;.. : .o~ . a. lease.

':::~,"F:f~~ ~:;;~:~f!~;q~~" ~·~~e£~~;:2::r~~~::~I;:~ ~~I:~~~\~~;~~:PE:c~::~~~::,:~:~f:~:~~~~~~:'::;~

~ ·:.·:;··~ !·.A? i."j'. i-! ,". nature is :nQl alienable.
- '.' .: ::,:.. Subsequefl:tly .
. '. ". t~~:·, ., t.~!~;
':.0 ; -~ f.i Under clause 1(a), 5ubseqllcntly would m ea n subsequent to the con~ ract
and uplo . the date of th e dec ree. Th ere is ;) ni c e point to be no ted. If Oil
the ®y of the professed transfer, the transferor was forbidden by law and
~;. ,~: \,~ .
'~':" '~::"'.\ '
·· ri ·'" . ·.·.·II\',!·!·
····'\.·'\\':/' .. subsequently, i ( the vendor acquires a transferable right, can the promis ee
enforce his right under this clause? A distinction mllst be m ade between a
trans.a ction for bidden by Jaw and an Interest not transferable under law. If
' ; \\ 1 . t· (\ : '"'"" ~\\ i ·,'.
the Interest was not transferable under law at the time of the con tract B,nd
.... ;: :" ' \', \ :" ·:'''·r(' ,:.
clause v. 1963, Punj.136).
. subseque:nt1Y. if it becomes' transferable, relief can be obtained under th is
(Kalial Madden, A . I.~ .

.i\i "' ",J~~~ ,t~~:9S\:!:' .~~'i;'~1iO!!~~: :;o;;~y:~s ~~i:;,hl~~e~a~idl~: :~c;e~~~lrlb~d~c:~o:v:~r~:~o::

tne ' ca"nflr~atlon ' of the sale. After the Court sale was confirmed in fa vour

·~.:.i.i':.:~.:.;,;..:.'·,~.:.~ ~;. ,~;,:. .::.;.. ' o.f A~e~e~r;:eg:lg;e:~~nf;~:~:c:::.:;r::r~ha:cS:·leW~I; ~u:~;eCC;:o;erIY' and

~an be specifically enforced in the .circumstances : Pundli!< v. Jalnarayan,

. '.
,. \

.,:;:;;\:;~·~:'\t~;: ~:;\
\I";

' . '::"':"I'~,:y;.o,~.,...:~{;~ ..~:

.. Ocl.
IL.~.1 9.48 Nag. 81~. (B. U Ocl. 81, 84)
Clause (b) i,n ' this 'section applies to th os e cases where a person having
. :,'; . ,!:: ~-:. .!,!.·•..H: ' on.IY . ~n fmp,erfect ' tftl~ ·h.a s contracted ' to sell or leas e ce rta in property and
.~ .: 'In order to"'make the' tltle of the transfe ree valid, the cbncurrp.nce of other
\" " "i, ~. '.l;,r~;~t- :;. . persons Is necessary. and such persons are bound to gite their ' consent ilt
'.:.'::,';..•.',?. ;....',~..,~~:.~' .:~,..,;.~~..:~. \.:, ~ the request of. the .v.endor or lessor and such tran sfe ror is in a position to
-.... - "' . enforce specific performa'ric~ in respect of that obligation to .give the consent,

.·.i:fi~iii~t2~~\~· .;'~~Sfn:~:~c7~:·s:::~I:;~~f:::~~~3~:::::E~:~::f:~~n~h:i9~~:v~0 C:~::i::

.:; \. ~'; . :,:'" . \,.: :,.... . " th~ ,tach were as followS::
\: ..-.,. . There was an agreement be twee n th e ' parties for the sale of certain
. \i'\ 'I .
land. '. Th'~ nature of the land was such that Its transfer Was subje.ct to the
sanc't ion of C!Ii Revenue ' Officer . .It ' was h~ld by the Privy Council that in such
. ,r: ..
a case . there w~s an Implied covenant in the agreement tha t the contracto r

..~']/~;~~l;b;~~~;;'iE~.· 'i; .!
would do all things- n ecessary to affect such t ransfe~ includ ing an app li cation
to the Revenue ' Offi~er for sanction to th~ said transfer and thendore, th e
Counc il. ha d Jur isCliction to r:nake a decree for specific performance directing

..
;
~ ;,,~-,..:; .._., -.- .-., ..• .,. ~ ....".,. ."' ..,

..: r •
....
 ,
"
. SPECIRC ' PERFORMANCE ·-OF . CONTRACTS .... . ,.~., :

• : . I -

:~: 1h~i t/a~s'ier~~"1b:~~~pl~: for ' ~an~~;i;:n~~~:":~ co~~~y : i:h~ ' ~ro~:~~tY~~~.. r;C!~I~t ,: ~'f '
" this ' . ·such!;sa'nctlJ'n"}rr.r;..:~~~d ~ " : j"~ v: .,~ , I "'-f.3r'1:T t¥~~ ~ i _~; ,/ ~H~ r i :.1 ~ ::':~,91 ~~~k~.wlf1r~~~ Ir") ::', .",'; .~,"
'! i Prgii!e~Th.t~~feAd~ii~'!~~.~~dd)iC;~e.\ih'- l~ase"hiild'!j;I~tj~;q\'e ipJalhtlfF
,

.
lne is- ' on;obtalnlng"1he: l'erinJsslon,·of(:lh\thl~[jCommlsslon.r 'wJ{hl~:'twol!rrtonlhs q '
!
• under:. ...
. ., The .def~ndal'l i~\~~PQt. ·in~~.:· ~)( app.l\~~Ji'p.!1",q;_lp. ,~bl.!;C<)_fT',~I~s!"n~r ;nor; .
did he take any effecuve . steps. l. n; pi.I" ;.~lr~ctl~n . : To· w.hat. re!lef~ . ls the .
• Ids of plaintiff entitled against th .. defend;,,,f ? .. . • .' . .. . ' . '
"'t . 1 saie'- ' The plaintiff is entitled ~: decr'ee':fc;r '- specific pert~rmkince ';~lr~ciing
to
;; the defenda.nt to apply for permission "and ' to convey ~ the : j:iroperty on
C: vhl!re . '" receipt of such 'sanction. The, facts ;In' this . problem are very simIlar to Mati
:, Will ' Lal 's .case discussed above.' (B. U. June 75) .· .
Where the concurrence of the' \ h';d
party can~ot be ' proc' ur~d or is
c: Impossible to be procured in low or In fact, performance cannot be decreed .
ana the case .Is one for damages. (Sadwel/ v. Webster, (1980) 29 L.J. CH '-: ..

.-
- . '
ItracJ 73).
If on - Problem· A lease for a term 'of 99 years contained a covenant for
and renewal by the landlord at the end of the term "upon such terms and
'ise~ condi(ions as shall be . reasonable" ; During the term of the lease, the lessee
transferred his interest In a portion ,o f the property. On 'expiry of the term,
the ' lessee sued the lessor for a declaration that he was entitled to renewal
Was regards the part retained by him, (ii) alternatively as regards the whole
of the pro ~ erty demised. Will he succeed?

I .
'In this contract the lease can be renewed at the end of the term "upon
such terms and conditions as ,s hall be reasonable" . In such cases it ha s
been held that "There Is a standard of reasonableness which the Court
recognises and the ter~s are, therefo~e" cap~ble of being ~ade certain."
(Secrelary of Sla!e v. Volkarl Bros., 52 MI.T 443). Presumably Iransfer of
" . the part of the lease property was not , contrary to the original lease.
Therefore- the lessee will succeed w(th regard to tile. whole of the property.
(B. U. Apr. 81) '.
14. Contracts. not specifically enlorceable.-(l) The following
'contracts cannot ' be s'pec!flcally e'nf~rce'd, namely
(a) a ,contract for the non-p~~ior~-aric, of ~hich compensation Which "re , the
.in moneyls an ac;leq~at<reileC ', contracts not t!fl.
forced speclliclJlly
.:- (b) a contract which runs Into , such minute or numerous by courts ? SilJte .
. . oetails~lch' ISSO dep~nd~nt on th~ personal qualifications ' and dfscuss eXce·
."Nons, il IJny,
@.volition of1he parties,@»therwlse from its .nature is under . which IJ
:i1, \. -;·such that the Court' cannot enforce specific performance court may grant
of its material terms; ~.~ ~. specilic perlor·
ifn ' mance 01 the
he .~ (c) a conlr"ct which is in Its nature determinable; ~ui . 'contrdC/S wh ich
;h drs otherwise not
(d) a contr"ct the performance of which Involves the performance specllicdlly en lor·
of· a conliriuous duty which the Court cannot supervise. ceiJble.
(2) Save as provided by the A~bltration Act, i940-:--;;-~' ~o~~~act S.U. Oct. 90

J .~
Is irwo.WA ')j I'S.
~~ I) (j.v-
~~'" .,'
'~:',.u ....t<l
Wl'-iMD ~ ~ ~+vtw~~~ ~'*'
~
" ,
- ," JJ;-M
.. - .....
., .
- '..

"

b
 ,I'~',-, -'---='-~
- =~------------------------..,..--
'.-.
____
30 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

,to refer present' or future difference to arbitration ' s ha ll be

specIfically enforced; but if any person, who has made sud)' a
contract ' (other than an arbitration agreement. to which the
, provisIons cif the said Act apply) and has refused to perform It,
;uesji'l respect of any subjeot which he ha. contra~ied to refer,
the' exIstence of s~ch contract shall bar the s0..L-- ,, '
r ~· , .. •.. , "

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (a) or clause

.... (b) or clause (cr of , sub-sect ion (I), the Court may €.1 forte ' -.
speclflc performance In the following cases: -
(a) where the suit is for the , enforcement of a contract,-
(i) , to execute a mortgage or furnish any ' other security
for se"'l rlng ' the repayment of any loan which the
borrowe rlC>ls not wl11iny to repay at o nc e : . ,
llI:'Provided that where only' a part of -th e loa n has been advanced
the lend,e r i"R-wiliing to advance the remaining part of the 19an
). In terms of the contract; or
,i' ' (il) to take up 'and pay for, any debentures of a company;
1 (b) where the sui t is for,-
f (i) the exec'J tion of a formal deed of partnership, *
• the
Commtlnt · ·on., th.
·'1'
,j follawmg by giving par(les having commenced to carryon th e bus iness
! . . iJlusir4t1cn" -
A c~ntNld ;""hkh '
of. the partnership; or
-Iii) the purchase of a share of a partner in a firm;
'.
. .Is! In. Ils.1I, d~t.f.
· min4bt. C4nnot~·h. ,, (c) where the suit is for the enforcement , of a contract for'
· speclfi~11y . flnfor-
ced. In ' conskl.a-
the construction of any building or the execution of any
· tJifi .~: of ·~·c~r/~/n other work on land :
· property . having'
Provided that the following conditions are fulfilled , namely
: Q"et(l[~(Uf-J to
: B ..,I~y .f4" :" !!:'-'f!/-f.~ . (1) th\, building or' other work Is de's cribed in the c;o~-tract
• ~r4cJ$ to'!r o/UII" 'a ' In terms sufficiently ' precise to enable the COllrt to
-·J.o !~In ·· ~' '' · r. ~
,·., c.r:~~~·c ~~~ : .I.V-,
.
';. ouP'lei ·th" : extent determine 'the 'exact nature of the building or work;
".: ;:( 6tR~; ':io/00I)~lJrid ' (il) the plaintiff has a substantial intO!rest in the performance
~ .
;" ti/';,j:honiiiiP;'A's"
.diar/~':"\ 'Io . ·':ih4t' ' of the contrad and the Interest is of such a: nature
i ..: .
~ ,;;;ai/iii.'.S ." 'tJJls tto that compensation In mon ey for non-performance ' of
1
,
J"
~: open ~" 4 ~ 'credit in
· A ~ · /tJvour:.'.a·iJ(rto
the contract is ~ot an adequate relief; and
.. . .' ~ ' . .
"

;
, ·~:~~r~~:;~; .
en'or~e ,, ·'t:IJ.d th".
, (Ei) the'defendant has, in pursuance of the con tract, obtained ,_
' possession of the whole or any part of ' the land on
.i conir4ct1.' ~ ~~'~:.~., . ' which the building Is ', to be constructed or other work
,.,-;,~.: ~:Pi ~pr" 83' is to be executed,
...... ',.;- ..:

... .
 SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE v ,' . CONTRACTS 31
.:.; I , . ~ '
., . ' -;:/, ,'
: _' . . -.::. _, . '. . .'.",. . '. ; ', '.
:·1< ., :' :\S . .14 . of ' the Specific ' Relie! ,Act 'deals \ withcontractS ,.whlch · cannot · be " ",
•. t ~'p-e:~lf!~any :· enforc~d .. The :~·~aln. ·~g.ro.und~ 'ion ' ..~~Ich.~t~e} ~«:?htra~ls . may ...be.~ .. ,
hall -\le , ;

re~.d. Jo :.be •.enforced . are. ·"de.q~.cy.'of :compensatlotlhrutlljty ,of enforcement .

~uch -a" ,
or ImpossibIlity . of enforeement. 'J t .may .be ; noted :. that)speclfIc : relief .,under' ·
ch
.
' the,
-, English law de~'loped to inakegood :fh•.deflcI~nc.l.,. :pf,Aciirrricih :iav,.:rellefsi:
.
orin It. Where the common 'law remedy; :e:orrlperisation. ~s 8d~quate, . 't he Courts of -.
-: '

equ'lt~;' would " n6t lriterve'nc; The .~ ·~~~ ' prlnclple ls.· co~tal~~d ,In S. 14.

"; F~r'ther, it. must be noted that_'speCific pe~formance is

a' discretionarY. EnumerMB the
,
reli.ef and the Court may 'refUse to' grant the specific performance of a contr"c/$ wh(ch
*', c!ause contract ev~n th~ugh slJch ·co:nt~~ct· ~oe! ~ot fall under S. 14, cannot be spe·
.nlqi'G.! dfiC411y enlo'rced ?
._; Before speclfi~ performance ~f a '~oniract can be clal~ed there must be B.U. Oct. 92
four certainties, certainty as to price, as_to the parties, as to the property
:t f -=.'. "..( 'and as to all other terms of the contracL S. Goenka v. S. C. Gupta, AIR
(198'1) Cal. 37. " .
!curity ·

•
THE CONTRACTS WHICH CANNOT BE SPECIFICALLY
hthe ENFORCED UNDER SECTION 14
(a) 'contract for' the non· erformance of which compensation is an
an'c'ed adequate relief.... Co"mpcnsi\tion must be adequat-e in l'le min . 0 l1C.
loan , Court for some reasons found as a fact and stated -by the Court for holding
it to
be adequate in spite of the opinion of the plaintiffs that it is inadequate.
", Brii Ball.., v. Mahabir, 78 I.C. 167.(A).
pany; ~
Write a short note
(b) (i) r Contract
•
which runs into such minute and numerous
,
details; or
'. ~ on : ContrlJcts not
(10 w!u'ch is so dependent on the personal qualification or volition of spedfiC-"lIy enlor·
the the !uulles; or ced.
ine5s ~. .. (iii) otherwise from its nature is _such that the COliC! cannot enlsce B.U. Apr. 85
, ~ .~, '. , " performance 01 its ma.terial terms. Oct. 87
- : :~ Contracts runn ing Into minute details will not be _e nforced because the Write d $hort hote
' .. ~
Court cannot be required to wat!=h and supervise the performaryce In d~t.ail on : Coni,.ads of
t 10rO. '. ' of -such acts, Contract.s 'Iike contracts of personal servlc.e . ~annot be specifically penon,,! SflJ"Vicc, ~
:::.-'.: .any;" :: : enforced as such contracts' Qcpend .on the personal volition of the parties. ' . B.U. Oct. 86.'
,;. "' -~ ,.. <- ,_, Musta/~ -v, District . Bo.ard, 5'6 Alia', 573, The bar und~r thjs ' c1l1use Is
; ,. ., . applicable to ' both' affirmative and negative covena~ts and_ whether the Wril., d .hort nots
• - ily f' on : Co~trdcts 'not
.. j J;.,;.;! :;. ;; empio¥er _Is ~ _privat.~ f'~rso.n~, ~,~ c,~mpany, R~mch"'anara v . . chip-6bhai, AIR .
,or
, !raet ' 1944 Born. 76; Hlnduslan Sleel v. Yerghese, I.L.R : 1968,.( Pat. 13, A
spedfically enlor-
ce.sble.
i' to ' ' contract 'to marry would fall under the -ca(egory of sl.:'ch c0r11~a"cts for which ·. I . B.U. May 91
~k ;, ·,0 .·
the Colirt cannot enfor~e specific -p erformancE 'of materJa(tEirms. 'Purshollam
·i l · v: P;"sholtam)---21 Born. 33 , · ' . Write d short note
[nee ;'
'. . \ ~(al -1 . contract 'which is" In its ' natu..re determinable, - For example, it is on : Entorcem~t
ure· · ( futile to enforce the' ~pecific performance of a partnership at will. of COn/raCIS : 01 "
I .I . Personal Service.
, 0 " , (bi A contract the performanc~'-'~f ~which involves the periormance 01 a B.U. May 84
con i/m~qls duty which the Court ca ~l1ot s{-/pcrtlisc, -The sale test under this -, ..
"id _ ~Iause is
wh et her the con,t ract Is suc~ that the Court ' c'annot supervise its Write lJ ,shprt note
. performance, ' inasmuch a.s it involves the performance of a continuous duty , ~n : De91t,rlJtion to
on Cenlral Bank v. Vyankalesh, I.L.R : 1949 Nag. 106. The duty relerred to enforce lJ ' contrdct
~rk '7 '~· here is " posit"lvc duty to do something and not a negative duty not to do 0/ perianal service,
someth ing , because in the' latter ·.c ase there is · ~o . question of Court being . ./l.U. Apr. 78

" :.1
-j ' .

-- i t;

".
~
 - •. r S"

32 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

~. ; " ,
called upon to supervise , Lall"M,1 v, Chillaranjdn, A,I.R. 1966 GuJ , 189.
Howe.v er t the' House'.:-.J5f .lords allowed specific performance ' ·e nforcfng· the
~. , defendant to pay a weekly sum of ·£ 5 on the ground, othe,;',;ise ' lt would
,. lead to mu:'"pliclty of actions, Beswick v. Beswick, 1968 A .C. ?B;
<:,i· ·.···· , '. Contracts of personal servi~e
i: _ . .: :.
.;'-'1 ,:1
..; ". ,.
. A contract. depen·
. per- Several authors. on th...e law of specific relief are of the opinion that
dent on : the
·-,:,t · , 'contracts of . p.ersonal servic~ are . not specliically enforced. Several reasons
.•
•
~.':_....
.~:'.:;. .".,~:..,., ,:,I; ..,·••.:.'..... .-~._/. -, ~;~/i.~~1..~~':;j%:
7'-
II .'
are given for nC?t . granting specific performance of contrl'lcts of 'personal
-service. Firstly. It Issaid "that contracts of
personal service are based on
.-

.,'..'.". ',. ,'.

.~
-'.:~ ';~ •. p6
,;".• r'·."'~;~'}"I:<...:.,LJ.·,.;,A.l,·.·,~,r,'" .,.'83
persori'al f~ith
and conildence. Further, It Is said that enforcement of such
contract would ·In~olve detaJled s~pervision.: It Is also considered enforcement '"': -.
·. -No 'd~r4tion to ~f su.c h contrads - of personal service would b~ opposed to public policy_
en/orc. of eontr4ct These reasons for hesitation in granting specific performance of contracts
01 . 4 p_rson41 of personal serVice might have been valid in time when it was consider~d
~ . , . $ervi~e .' wilt be that there was complete freedom of contract between the master and the
,; .. .:.." .' • .
nom14IJy gr4ntiUI. ~
..' ComniMt, · . servant. It should be noted that now the concept of the freedom of contract iI
, B.U, Apr. 81 has been progressively curtailed· by constitutional law and labour legislation . !
,,.
.::. ':.. _ ': ' h '

1: , I ', , '0. ·Oct. 83-- Under Artl.c1e 311 of the -Con .. tltution; the c1v.i1 s.er...vant has a right to claim '
i reinstatement if his services are illegally or irregularly terminated . Further, . I
'." ',:' und·er labour legisl~tlon, the Ifldustrial worker has bee~' · given ample- protection
I
,.
"" against arbitrary breach of contract o f personal service , In view of these
developments , it. may not ~e proper to consider that sp ecific enforcement' I
.,
' .~.
j
,r
of contract of personal service is opposed to public policy. On the other
.. ~. ~ / ..! hand, lord Denning in Hill v, CA. Parsons & Co. Ltd. (1971) 3 All. E.~ .
r
,i· ~ .
,.
1345 has made a categorical observation that in certain cases decl(lring
termination of service to b'e Invalid is consistent with the needs of the tim e. I
;
i
I,'
.,
·He would not hesitate to 'grant 's uc h declaration even though it. Virtually
amounted t9 specifi,c enforcem~r:'t of personal s~rvice,
,.",'.
However, the ~;upreme Court .has hell in u.p. Warehouse Corporation
I J

''''.
", Case -(1970, I. S. C. J, i93) that no declaration to enforc~ a. contract" of .
'f: personal service will be normally permitted but the Supreme Cou r t has fai.d
dowr;t three exce..2tion~to the above rule ,
~I .'

' ..
~ :. ..... ': . ' .- '-. , '(1) Contracts of personal ~ervice 0.1 Civii servants under ArticleXlla.Ckq
..... ,
the Comtitutior:t. . . • >

.....o :.;:,' e2} Servic§as of ~orkmel} under labour or Industrial laws . .

(3) Services under a statutory body which is governed by ,statut.9 ry
instructions in COllnection with tDe services .
As to contracts of personal service involving a relationship of m~ster ··or
servant, Halsbury ·Iays down, that a judgement for specinc performa-;1ce 0.£ a
., " .
c·o ntract f~nal work or services is not pronounced, either at the suit
.' :.'..i.~ . of the employer or the ~mployee. The Court does not seek to compel
;,.t.:'
.. :. :
persons against their will to maintain continuous. personal and confidential
, '. relations, However, this rule ' is not absolute and without exceptions. No
.Court may, wh~ther by way' of an order of specific perfo rmance of a
." ~

.
>l
:,
:: ".:. r. : "" .1. , , " 1 ;' :,•• • ••
contract of employment or. an ' injuncti o n restraining a breach of threatened
',~ , :. . : '. ' .' "..
I:.
'.; . 'breach of such a contract, compel an employe.:! to do any work or: 'attend at
.... ' . any place for the doing of any w9rk . Th is principle applies not m erely ~o
! :
.'
 .,....
' ~'I
..,:.. SPEClAC PERF.ORMANCE;OF CONTRACTS ,.. , ,,33
.~.. . , .. :. ~, ,I ;.. •. . .i ...
1 . " ~~~'. .
h •••,:·i.··. I-;L:~·.: :· .~. . ;: '~.:"..'.'
5 GuJ , 189, ; ~... ~~ntr~;~ts ··~f ·e~ploy~e~tl;~}j~i·:. t~';~i(i,onlr~cts .whjch: fnv.olv~i·the :re'nd erlng .of
l(orcrrlg the . ,cont'inu~~'lse'rvice~ .hy ~'on·e~·pe·isoh,;to~·.~~~ther ,.such ~as)!'i.contract to':work a . .•... f.
:se 'it w~uld .:' ;'~'.- .~ !.\~~n~y ;lj~~~+[ija·l~b:iy':';~~~~~C~W~f~~·t. ~~'~t~d ~'by~"'th~'i'S~r:r~~le 'C(;Uti in
58) .... '~\ ':', tW;'Hgg';lIblf/o'p,':'gli1JP~!tB;;iil YfftJii7:i/rll: Ali'i ','('f99l)}SCT f5-251~ CI':" '('. "

:\~ "·'··~.··f·;!~~~.~' ,:::}:~·,\~~AGR~'E'~N~~.T9~~t~~\fo AR~rntATt~I~~~~0 .~:3 . ! !'. .~ .

- . pi~lon
•
'

that " AIl"ag'~~'~;n~~ts t~ ';~i~; :'t~ ' a~~i~r~tlon are :gove~'ed by · th~ Arl:iit~atlon un . 4
" ·: ,'1/

FMrty /0 ~
"-• • r'~i reasons A~.t . '1940 ~1 The: remedy 'of ~a'ny party'. to .s~ch agreement.when . the ·oth.!r. conirdd refer JX~.
- -,f !personal party Is not 'wlillng "to .proceed 10 arbltratiori''would be 10 ,,,,.2!~, .I~ r, J.iDng th_~ , ' sent or future
! base-d on · agreement In -Cour!. under Section '21 ' of the above Act, Sub'sectlon (2) of · differences 10 arbi-
lrlJb'on IJnd . obl4in
!nt'i>l' il,lch . $ eCl1OriT4orllie5peciftc Reltef ''AcI- provides Ihal -In' case oi arbltrallons ,10
specific perfor-
nforcement . whicn the ArbIITaUon Act Is nof. appltcab!~ the: agreement fOferred to .rblITaUon mime. ther~f ?
,lIc= poiJs y,' cannot be specifically enforced. B~t the sub-section prevents from enforCing Explain the legal
f contracts arw other right!" under that agreement by a pers9n..~ho has failed to submit effect 01 ' An
considered to "arbitration. .." . . "rbltr~tion c/IJlJse
aT and tfie
p

in con. when
)f con~rac~ . EXCEPTIONS
.-,.. . IJ
d
suit I
""

led for

~
b-SeCtiOn(3). of, Section~ . . provides certain exceptions specific performlt-
legislation,
.(a) A contract to execute a mortgage. . nCfl of contrAct.
1t . to· ~Ia"n
IJ
S.U . Apr, 81
I. Fu, lher" s a rule a contract to lend mo~ey cannot be specifically enforced, and
prot, m . therefore, an agreement to mortga'ge as ' such 15 also not capable of specific
I o f these performance; the 'remedy Is by' way 'of damages. Jdyddyal v. Rdm, 17 Cal.
(orcement 433 (P. C,), However, clause (a) of sub-sectld~ (3) makes an exception and
,tne other / provIdes that a contract to execute a mortgage" ~r furnish an)o~ other security
All, E:R. for repayment 'of any loan which the borrower Is willing to rep8Y It at once
d ec'l,. rll'g prOVided . that where only a part of the loan h~s been. advanced, the lender ,
Ihe "tI;"e" Is willing to advance remaining ' part of th~ loan in
terms of the contract.
,

", virtually". This clause permits specific performance of a contract to security where the
".'
'i . "I
.<-
-~
loan has. been actually advanced but' the ~rrower refuses to execute the
rpor4.,!lon mort ge. . \' .
·ntrait :of· (b) A contract 10 lake up '6nd P6J/ :for any de~entures of a company~
•
, h.,. laid . may e specifically enforced . . h ,

(c) 'f the suit is for the execution 016 lormal peed of partnership after
Ihe . rUes' haJing commenced to carry on. the , business of the partnership
or for 0;; purpose 01 ~ shar~' of 6 .partner in if firm, it may be specifically
enlorced. . .. . I'
.- "
• •.i "

"
~,tatutory -- (d) Suit for the enforcement 01 lJ'· contract lor Ihe cons/ruCtion 01 any
bUilding or the exe~ullon " ol~ny oih.er work ' 01 land may be specifically
,2lstel . , enforced If the follOWing conJitions ' ~re flllfilled,-
lee o 11; a 1-____-li)..Jhe-building- or-other-worD.Ld.~tlbed In the contract in terms
the suit suHlclently precise to enable the Court" i~--determlne the exact nature
comprll or the building or workj '
nde-n ti~1 (II) the pla intiff has a substantial intel'..s t In the performance of the
Ins. No ' contrac t the Interest Is' of such a nature that compensation In
e of a ' money for ' non-performance of the contract Is not an adequate
aatened ., reliefj and ' .
:Iend at - (ill) the defen'd ant tJ,as, In pursuance of the contract obt~ln~d possess ion
!rely .lo of _the whole 0': any part of the land on which the bJildlng Is 10 be
'1

SR-3

....... '- -........ -

.~
., - '.
 :i
"

.'
'I, j
, 34 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT
i r·'· .
.. , ~

,i i. constructed or other 'work .Is to be executed.

,.
Who may obt;in specili~' performance. -Except 'as otherwise '
. is. ~ :~~.;

~
'provlded .by thIs Chapter, the specIfIc performance of a contract ~,
,~ ~ ' " ,'-. ' " . ' \.~ may be ·o bta.lned by"':' . .
~"'U
.1 """ ' .'., .,~
.)(..IV'-\..I
" , " " ~"" :. '~:. '.'.. .. (a) anyyarty thereto;
'ZXZ-t ..,.~,;z.a -V1- t.''S1,vv 'oW' 0. ·--"""""1'I..,V
~' l.o~"l..p ,p·,J.. .........v..-
. r"." .'~I-
•
A. • I '..0 ' ' '''' ' ' " ,. ... ., (b) the ' r~presentatlve In ' Interest or the prIncipal of any
, 1~~\ ~"VJ .:'4A.P<.-'I' party thereto : ."~ ;<L... o-"'O."l.~
irfr. VJ X ;c/tJl[:.)~~: ../I""'~Iii;<':.fdJ~'lI.Q . ,f'rov'lded . that wh~re the learning, ' sk!!l, soi'~~~~ or .· any
; .
i e4.Q.. "'~:;; ."~~.~~Q , personal quality . of 'such party · is a material 'in'gredlent 'In the
Ji ':'contract, or where the contract provides that his Interest shaft
'not .be il;slgned, his ·representative In interest o~ his prt'nclpal
shall' not be entitled 10 specific performance of the contract,
:/:....unless such party has already performed ~is part of the contract,
. ,} " ~r ·the performance thereof by his representative in interest, or
J'"".,lk·y,.c:I'f... )' ~ - . ,
';
.1
'i 1..> '.
.,
..
~ . .,l.
. . r."' , '. ,. , th~.
.hl~ principal, has been accepted by the other par1y;

A:. jC) .where

.... .
contract Is a .settlement on marriage" or a
.
' ~~ .. J. ..:.' ;, . ~:;" . compromIse of doubtful rtghts between members of the

,p? . .
,I .
~ .\ c~ · , 'r;_l .' .•.. -, . I'(/J. . / same family, any person benefiCially entitled thereunder;
)-,~ }./ S- .
i!, (.y:J;r" ;
. \,I'
"'~ OJ ~~ ; . (d) w,h e:e the contra;ct has been entered into by a tenant for
"
J
i' .f' C~~· , ~. .. " , ,l~f. In ,due <:xercI~e of a power, the remalnder·man; :
. ~ vj~ r-e.v- {)+.-..,O.P,.AIn ~". . h h
';I r /' ;, .r""-J
. ()'\y ' :"-
I ~:r '. . ,,('re) -a . reversioner I
p~~ses slon, were t e ag.reemen t s a
,I' "j~ :.5J"" . '. .... ~. .\~~ovenant entered Info with his predecessor In tit le and .
"'~ '\w <:1, . " .sp.cllic ci'i!;Y.. the reversioner is entih"d to the ·bendit of such covenant;
,.1
WhO"

monco
n",y .obf.in
p.rlor·
of , .
. i· ' ,
(I) a reversioner in remainder, where the agreement such
· . -'" ...:
~

1~ centrocl? a covenant; and the rev'e rsioner is .entitl,zd , to the benefit

IS
'/ . o:~

Ii' ... ~,U. Ap<. 81 thereof and will susta in material injury bY- reason : of its - :.t
;-. ih. promolm of breach;' cP"~LV:./..t.C\.1 ':"'-""'(-"-'-:"'1
0;. •
-.
I~. " . con"",ny h.v.
b~ ~~
(g) when a' cc'npany has entered into a contract and subs.equently
. .
, porol/on, onfor.d becomes amalgamated with another company, ·the. ne.w
j. in/o 4 centrad lor :, : ', ~ompany -Which .arises out of the a'm algamatlonj --
th. PutpOs. ·01 M. . ,-. • ' , .- .
Co. .nd ... tlr.(h) when the . promoters of il company have, before: .lts J0
.confrlJd/; ""'",n- ' ~'d-'I.-ljncorporation, .. entered into a contract for the purposes
f.d ~Y tho forms ~"'?Qf the company, and such a contract .is warranted by the
01 Incorpor4tion. \ l~ f h . h .
}In'a.,, ",h.t cir·. r t~rms 0 t e .mcorporat{on • .t e cornpany: ,.~

, · cum~f.;,c.,
Ih. Cd: "ft.r
<in ~ . Provided that the . company has accepteci the contract and
.. ' . ,. .
Incorpordlon gill-' has communicated: ' .such acceptan . ce to. the other party to the
;"P.cflic j,.rfor· ' contract.
m4nc(I' 01 111.- $.Ilid - As '.21. rule o nl arti th e co ntract are bound by the contract ' and
. e;ontracl ?
B.U. Oct. 83
they alone can enforce the""""~;tract. ut Sec. 15 provides cert!i n circumsta~ces
'.

-~ '.
 {

., .
,
,. SPEClF!!==., PERF9M1J\NCE . qF · !==OJ:fl.~c:rs riiJ !. i

·r ••
',' , ' , :' .;' ~?,. ...' . : ::: ,\ !( ':'-,;, }.- :
und~t · w.~f~,~ . partles :.; ~tJ;er.?lha?"'~1h~s~ : \lfh~ ·.n~erHW1JP/~~:,.~nt~~.f.~ may ' be
. .' ~,~~.!~}~;~ " tf ·..o~\~ll ~' :th~ ::,S.~,,~TI !~c :'R~~l~Q0~~fj~b~~: '-~. ~Sf:~~~~~.<~·;(~:~If!:': ' . '.
'-
"., ~.,

cithe;;;ise '. .1 :Und.r....clause (b) .01. ·thls '·seello!!. the ·,·~p~clflc .:I).rfom)anc~..,of ,A :contract
:may ";be, ~~~~a~ned · b!ii~pre~e~~!ti~e,~: in. ~1. n!~~~(:6~~~~:.:~a~~tp~(~f . any
~

.- '\ ):o,~'lr~ct party exC'eptlng whe . ... ~ !,,: !,. ;'::-: j.6~ ::! . ~ :~.·i!) ';r.: ,: 2. ;::(1": . Jj ;1':"' l.f::i'.~ ~. ·h ";-)

, ~
ti) ~ny per~onal ;;~~lit~ of ,th~< ~SSlgnOr i~ a' ';'aterl~I 'I~gretflent In the
:!f - contract, or ..' i <:, 0', :
1: :of . any ' (II) the contract Itself provides .thal It should not be assigned; or
•
(IIi) the contract Is n~t assignable by statutcj or
or ,· any ' (Iv) the assignor has only a pe'r5on~I ' lnterest .· . . .
It :'1n the' Under ' clause (e), a pe~son ben: flclally ' entitled under a settlement of
" marrlag.e or under a compromise 'of doubtful rights between the members of
'est 'shall
" the sarne 'emilu may obtain specific performance of the contract. This Is
..principal
-) " again an exception to the general rule that only the parties to the contract
cont'ract, can enforce It.
contract, PROBLEM·- 5, the Widow of A; brought suit against A's brother B for
erest, or pOJScsslon of certain lands. A compromise decree" was pa~sed whereunder
>.J~! B undertook to pay maintenance at a certain rate to 5 during her lifetime
and after her death to her daughter·in-Iaw P. P who was no't a party to the
compromise brought a suit for recovery of arrears of maintenance. Will P
t-.~
succeed? .
Ans.- P Is entitled to the benefits of a co"!promi.s-o;! of doubtful rights " __
between .members of the same family. It is" not clear frpm the facts given In
the pyoblem wheth~r P bro~wpe suit .for m.alnh:~nance durtng the lifetime
of S' or after her death. Pr~ly the suit for arrears Is after the death of
S. There f~re P can obt;,ln 'speclf!c ' performance a~d dalm for arrears of. ao.......,,;t..eAi ~
maintenance accrued to her., (B. U~ OCI: ' 8.;).be
~e ~-" ~ w;:.. . ~- . .I
. 16, Personal bars to relief.· Specific pe~lIrlce of a 'Contract F+~ Qr ~V\
cannot be enforced In fa.v our of a person-; ' '. . a{ ~ CY ~ fc,v.k
(a) who would not be ' entltled' to recover compensation .for GU-Ol. ~,.r
Its breach; or < ~' . " , ' " r od li IA.S<:J.~u-f ' €(J.rc. Jf rVlju,,;
, ..
\ ~ ~

.,
(b) who has becom~
Incapable 07 pe~formlng,
or .vlolates any _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ~
\q\:i~ntly '. ~
. essential terms . o'fthe contract that 01) his part remains ,~~ ~ct
Ie: ,new to ' be performed, cr acts In fraud of the ' contract , or l£.l.N,. .
F,\ ~ r
,
:
, ,. wilifully acts at ' variance iYith, or in subversion of, the J G
~ re . les rel~tlon. In~~nded t.o be~stablished by the contract; or ~ ' r~_ ~
Irpose~ '(c) who . faHs to ~~prove that he has performed 0 ' ~.uJ :
:by the ,..
: ..... ....
has always pe;':;-;:eady and willing to perform the essential
te~~" :of. the contract which are to be p.erformed by him,
:t ~nd other than terms the. . performance of which has been
to 'the prevented or ,waived by :the ' defendant',
• Explanation,· For the purposes of clause (c).
~ct ..a~d. (I) wh.ere a contract Involves the payment of money , It Is
.
"1 ,stances."
'.
;,
••
~
~
~

.-"
,

iI I

•
 'I ~ ".~

,
i
!
I

36 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

.f
., ,
net essential fer the plaintiff to. actually tender to. ' the ,
, .'
. .... . defendant . or to. deposit 'any me'ney except when so. dir~~ted
- -I'
do" , . .. 1 by the ' Ceurt; . '
>-
"- .
, ' '- .: , ' '.'
:'. (Il) the' plaintiff must alier perfermanc.e ef, er, readiness .. and "'- ,
. - ~
. Willingness to. perferm, the centract accerding to. Its true .~

.,,
'I
censtructlen.
IIlus/rations
.-,
, 1. A obtained mortgage decree against B for' sale of Whlteacre and.
.!
BI~ckacre . Ther,e after Whlteacre was sold under a prior mortgage. C 'bei.ng
.: ....: . :. . . ~~'
. . ; d~Irous .of purchasing
• . ! :J'. p. ' . ':' .
UJ'hiteacre cheap agreed to purc,;hase
.
A's decree•
for
, , B~. 19,000 and thereby prevented A's executors from bidding and . getting
, •' ~
~ . o'

.:,~ !.
..W&.i.~e~cr.~ :cheap: Qwl119 to ca~ses for which C was not respon'slbfe,)here .'
~~i~' :~ ' ~r~at del~y. ~~ assigning A's decree to him, lmd eventu,ally it 'bcc;:am€;
'.
.j .' ::
,, . barred and C thereupon refused to take an assl,g nment or to pay t~e , Rs •.
l?,~pO : In a su,t ,by A's executors f.o.r specific performance, held! !~~t the~
i
j contra'ct could 'not be specifically enforced, the plain tiffs being ' un'able to '
I " ~ ~ . · p~aorm ·'the ir part of the contract. " " "
.!
I
-: ..... .-
: ,, ~,
i,
,>/: Wher~; lh'~ " vendor sells: an ~state' of ~hl~h
he Is not in possess,'l on'", in
· ,i " , • " ~.~ol1~\deratl,?!l of' adv~nces, to enpble him to sue (or its recovery, ) t is no t ,
, , . opp.n to" the purchaser after faWn'g to complete his part of the contTact, to .'
;. ." .
'1" ' ,,' claim specific performance . arid delivery of the reserved estate on tendering'
'. ' . ,: .. the, b'alan~e of ~h,,'' purchase ' money. (-8. U. Ocl. 1985) ," - " " ,
d·, '.','.:LA, mortga~o' ; 'mortgaged hl~ property for 15 years on co~;diti~'\ ' th~t :'
!, ,, ~C?~~~gE;e . ~oi.Jlf·~.a~e '~~rta!ri In~;alment . payments towards . ~ d~q~,e ~gainst:.
i'I I
!. .....
:J.llO!!~~~.<?r.
It ~a~ . .h~ld that the fiJ i!ure of , mor/glJgee to mlJke ' paYfTJen.ts " ;, ••
exonerated the mortgagor and entitled him to resc ind his par,t. qf l ' ~<:; ,
'.'

!Jr" i
, .•.
~; contract, ' .'
1,: ' : , '
"
.' I '
.
"
... . '
.
~~ -,~: -
' ! . ' ~ ,.-.
1 I 4. Where there' was an agreement of sale the purchaser wanting to buy . •.I ; . ..:-•

'.'.
,1 "
• . , .
i;, i
.0
through a society the application for the necessary government s.,anctiQn : ...... -
~' :': , " i ; :':" .ft.: ' havll)g been · made accord ingly, the vendor refused to execute the sale deed:' - '."
,
~t- :' ',:. " '~ , ' : through the .society. It was held that the contract was not . Incapable '~f "; - "
~ I being performed as the mere Insertion of t~e words ,did not show tbat;4. !. --

R
"or •

;1
, .. ,, I .. ,~ , :'. V
. ~. ~had·. u'nd~rtlJl.k~n to .s ·e t the sanctlop In favour of th~ purchlJlse~ t~ro,:,gh the-
.i, '. ".: " ,\~ \( society. " ..... . ' . ,
,, :: . . : !'.~\:~" 0/, :,'.
P.rob/~m- A pledg~ certain Jewels to B"i.o secure a loan . 8 dis'pose.s of .. I
,, :.

J; "
. ::t:;, '.' )(p . ' th-; Jewels..before h~ Is e~t1t1ed to ,do s9'/ A without nlJlvlng ~aid or t.enderea
'I
1 ! ~ ~:"":: r::)(' .i ~~.
~.' ....\~~..... : ~ '<
" thei ~~m~u'1t 9,( 1C?~.!l, :~u~s B:,for ;POSSeSS}On of the j~wels . Will A s~cceed ?
. ' :, ~.n.s:.. ' Th~ "ba$i,~ princ;iphi invol~e4 here is "He who w~~ts . equL!Y
1 .. ", .:'.. --,...:.. ~ ' . m~t do eqUity, A without having r aid or tendered the amount. of. loan,
/'. . " , ::,,:/]---7.,- --..:: . . c t~ sues ' B for possession ' 'of . the Je\yels Th't:;-efore A will n'o t suc.ceed. (8 , U. _ •
r l'
'x~~
rJ'" ".V,,"
" j
.,
!, !;
!
'l
.
::',.' . Nov. 80) . :,' :
-':" 17, Contract to sell or let property ' by one who has no tlt/e,
..
no.t 'speclflcally enforceabie.-' (I) A centract to. s'ell <.>r ' let any
i ; .
Immevable preperty cannet be ,specifically enferced in fave;Jr ef
.,.... I'

ii, vender , er lesser- , . ."

"

..
 (

. ~" ."
.~
., SPECIFIC:~~RJ;9~S:.E:: OF i'.CONfRAqrs , ,, '- 33'-
. ,d (a);jW~9, .~9Wlng ~\~~1if'~Qt,t6h~ve .an~;~!I~jk:~the\\P!:op~rt0, :
ar ' fD ' the " li \;.'~i:has f~ontr~ct i!cl ttiri:~ ~ilt,or; ler~,the ''pi#plliYti}tif'h"j;; :.~Jk; ;t ,{t,
'i ,.
". .' ;9 : !b)".~fl~ 'Ylfl,tgh~'\\~\~til~~~(ti'lrtl~:~ih;i'~~ritiaet!$~fi~'(Jj'Ws.nffi~~ .
'I. " •

, :;di[ect!,d . ' .' ",

. ,.; .. •.f .•. ·~7 . · ~.dJ ' !q :.o;r:~ -fA d~ U.' I~ Vl ~!r.i"I·'lr"'''ti~!jl ~ A ~' f!'.', . ; ..I··.I ~; ' ~'~t.:· ~.'~t;Cfr{ · fS:O'~{ ' .d!.::.':;.It:'l
.. - i" ;J ... 1,;( , " 9- ~,'1 •.~~ ,, ~, .goc;!, "; ,t t,;; :;,~ Ih~i,pr~~er1Y,.,paJ'llq!.,CI . lit ,~,,.,t,\mJ!, .
.• n~ss.>and , fixed . by :the ;,paiihis ','01' bV · the Court . -for; completion . of
,-. ) liS- true .the sale. or letting, give the .purchaser :'o plessee , a title
free from reasonable·,dciubt.. · ... .. ,. .
,.. '
"(2) The provIsions of ' sub~s' ectlon' (1) shall 'also apply, as' far
. . . _. ' -0' ' . '. ! ' .... ."
eacre and as .may be, .10 contr~cts for the sale or hire of. movab,le prope~ty ,
c' .~ 'beilJg -- ""'" The differe ~ce' bctwee~ this section and S"ectlo n 13 must ' be: clearly'
de.~r~£" -(O!- -,
. noted. In Section 17 , the c'o~tract is to sell or Jet property by .one who has
cd .. getting no title' 'at ' all. Whereas under ' Section 13, the contract Is to sell or. let
' bl~i)ber~ property 'by one having .an linperfect title which Is capable 'o f ,ecUfi.cation
It · ·be·~:a~e afterwards. :: ..
y th~R~ _
Under clause (a),' the vendor or lessor knows himself not to ' have any
,:'that the • '
• \ ', ', I title to the property which he 'has cont,acted to sell or ·Iel. As obserJed by
uriaore to
Whi tely $tqckes, this clause would. no~ entitle the ven~or to sue for specific
!-) , , : ~. perfo~mance ~ven ·t hough he has stibseql..H~ntly acqul·r·ed , title to the property.
25510n,
. ~.' 1..'
In • It w~s held In 'XishanJaJ v. Nandeo, ' A,LR, 1943 Nag. 299 that If the
,:.\\cls not vend~r kriew that he has no title at ltte time of agreein~nt, he could not get"
~b-a'ctt 'to .specific performance even jf he could make ·out good title at the date of th e
t~iiderl~g suit.. · However, this clause does not invalidate ZI contract . but- It merely
··. ~ : :/f":'
:C! :~~. r..:.:~ prevents 'the enforcement "f spe~ifi ~ performa nce of . the contract. The
,tion that; parties may claim dam.a ges . . ,I • .• • x~'t~­

·~.;; ~.9~IAS.; .t Under clause (b), the ve ndor or lessor believed that he had a good title
..
·.::..-t~~:c

)~Yfle(!!s ;,: . but he could not comp' le~e the ·sale or .letting at the requisite time,
-I "
!:~_~~ff;~tge -
-
, fliustra(i~ns '
_· _·~ ·~ ; f · -. " 1: A widow ~ came ·Into· poss~ssion . ~f" certa!n . properties by virtue of a
- _- 1.to' buy ,
~.~ ;s'~~cjfon:~ .;.g;. will by the lasi mal~ owner;' Th~ te'rms of the will
did not clearly show that
·the ~~;oiute _es~te~ .was .. coiiferT~d 'o:n-~.tii~''-Wi dow. ·. The Court 9f WarCi~ who
• . ,Ie, de.d -'- f managed the prop'erUe.s on biha-If 'of. the' widow entered.·lntO: an· agr~ement
'labl'-?f . '~c::: 'S' ' with a $t;~~ger:. to -~·5ell her' properUe;,· b·e1ie"ttlng · th~t she had)ull proprl.e ta·ry
r t~at A .. ._< • ,,~" - tIt.I,: to th~ ·pr9pertles. .,b .n.. the p~.rcHaser 'refuslng to· take the. sale · deed·: the
hgt1 the .. .~. < t- Gourt 9.f ~ar~.· sll:~4 fo~. ~peclfic · p~r.forriiance- 'of th,e' contract _or ·for ··dcimages .-·
. H'el~,tliaf ,un'!e': ,Sectlpii 2'5(6r I~qw ·S.ction 17(1)(bll,t~e .' ·vendor vJa~ . not
oses entitled "'to ha ve the coritract specifically ehfo'rced Inasmuch·· as he was not
mder~d
·. l~"~ .' poSltion to give ·the · p'ir~·ha:~ er·:a . title free from~ reasonable doubt when
:eed ?. -the tI~e for co~plctlon · ~f the "sZlle ar'i-Ived and that he was not enfJtled to
. equity 4~m.age;. . -1.fi. ,. .. "'. :.'
~{". ,.";''''' . -". '..
·(.~· Ioa~, . 2, Pla1f'!up-(vcndor) · had;. pu~~ hased lh ~' property from a Hindu widow tn
(S, U, . '
po.sse.s~lo~ under a doc~ment p.urportlng · to . be . a will, w~lch was neither
.slgn~? nor attes.ted an~ the.. lan~uage was 21mbiguous as to ,the natu~e of t,I1e
, tlt!e, ,: "-, . " e5tate~ given. ' Held, that In .vlew of the defiCiency of pr<"of of the will and
t a-ny th'-e p~ssJbility of dispute as to its · construction, the . vend o r's title waS not
>u r ';f . free from reasonable doubt and hence, specifiC performance was refused.

, , , ',: ' . i
... ,'
'. I

,i .
,.\ ---_.
 /

38 THE SPECIFIC REUEF ACT

; ProbJem- A contract was made betw'e en a . vendor and a ,:.urchaser' for

.th~ sale of a busjn~s -' includlng the , premises . The premises were v!sted In ,
a c,o mpany which was absolutely controlled by the vendor by , virtue of .
shareholding and sole dir'ecior~hlp'. The purchaser refused to accept the
, contr!a ct '~n knowing th~t . the . premls~5 were vested In , a company on the
. ground that the vendo~ has' no title to ' the premises . The vendor claims . -'
..,
,.
specific performance. ' Ad vi se the purchaser.
, '
Ans. -Though the vendor was -In absolute control of the premises In
.ql:'~stl.on yet in the . eye of 'law the Company and the vendor are ~9 distinct
legaa persons: In this case the title vest.o; in the Company and ' ,not In the
verido'r~"'- Therefore ' the vendor can .lot claim speCific performance of the'
. Contract- . . . ~
, .
.' 18. Nqn -enforcement except with varlf!tion, - Where a plaintiff .' •
. seeks specific performance of a co<ntract In writing, to which -
J , ~ ,:,A yth'l ' defendant sets up a ' variation, the plaintiff cannot obtain
,I
,j

~
. _J~ ' the performance sought, except with the variation so set up, in
f 'rl . ~ th~ follOWing cases, viz.- ,i

, , 0P,\'_..:. ~ _, ;.yLrv'I , (a) where by fraud, mistake of fact or misrepresentation, the

•~-j.,lCl_ ; ..;JUv ' , (.)"->' rfl. "
, e. -'-'~
~ , ~
' 0- f' "
jP ~,\ r;J'-. .,.t'- "
r., written contract of which performance is sought Is in its
terms of effect different from what the parties agreed to, ,
or. does , not. contain all the terms agrp.ed to betw"en the
, ! '

' ! ,;y-'V",\ " ',

~
parties on the basis of which the defendant entered into
L ' • ~G ' \ the contract;
CY I '
:)~ ~, ,(b) .where the object of the parties was to produce a certain '
" ~., l~gal fesult which the contract as framed , is not ca1cu~"":- :'
li . to pr9duce; ~. ".-- .," ~. - -

,I
, l """, '.. ; --" , (c). ~here LIe parti~.; have, s\fbsequently to the 'executl,o n of.'-": ':. j --.

' r" ' _, ' " . ,: the contr~ct~" yaried Its terms. 'l
' TITLE FREE FROM REASONABLE DOUBT - MARKETABLE TITLE :'
,
.,, .' .
, .' '{; .th~e two' terms 'are ·synonymous. A title is said t~ be
-markeI4ble" "if it
i. :,- ' . Js"
" such:'as ~Jl. times "at
and ' u'nder" all circumstances may be forced upcn an '
. .,.
~
,": '.:~ '.,' uriwilU';g purchas~~'-:'~ The general rule is that "the Court will nof force ~­
"doubtfuLtitie .on a 'p~rchaser"" A title ' ls said to be doubtful where there Is a
, .... reasonable probability lof litigation concerning It= Ahmedbai v. Pelil,J.. 1909
- '.' ~ ".," " ''- ' "U " 'Born." L.R"
545' .or where It ' r';ts on a presu';'ptlon of doubt(~I , f.d:
.. •. · · ~;i~,':~,~- ,.:~ .
.. ,, '.\ -' . ,:..-,:~
The. 'duty' lies on ·t.he vendor to make out a perfect title to the property.
Thu/ "In Hajj Mahomed Milra v. Musaji, 1891 15 Born , 657, the 'tend or
"; ' . .:.: .':".. :: .. su~d the purchaser' for- Ipec'lfic performance of the ' contract. The pur~haser.
", ' (d.f~ndant) ple.ded that Hie vendor (pl.I';tlff) had failed to make out '~ good '
.,i : ~' . ': tH!i', to , the ' property, The High Court o'f Bombay held th.t under' the "-
. L present section the pl~lntiff -was bound to give , the . defend.nt • tlile free ' "

i, from reason~ble doubt and that the plaintiff having failed so to do, ~is suit
: . for·' specific perfo~ma'nc'e must f.ail.
•
. 'Harold Y. Ple~son, 1948 1 Ch;' 452.- A contract was made b'etween a
....
.'
"
"~L..._"_'__ ~ __ .;. ~ ~' __"' _~"_'
,<
'.

: : ~
,

.' SPECIFlC '--PERFORMANCE '-OF COf'ITRACTS 39 - "

.. ~ I. .. .. - . " ~ ~' ;_:"':-f.;-~~. - ", ' .. ', .I
~e~(jor\l~n~' ~a' '~i>~'~c~a~sir ~fb~r~~~~·iiii~"f ~~ . b~~in~$~~vlithof~lf~ ~ Inc'l udiq~ lh~!
~Tcha!'.er· for pre1ni~2s.~~·the·· \ p.r.~tTllses~W~r·~r~&'t~4' f In T~::jc6iri:p~n9 :.~~·flicn':.I;;"~s :~bsgluiely I .

ra . v!.s~ed 'In ,- con!rbYle({l!,'y:til"'-();;if'd o'''by :~l;l~!t{O:I ' !iI$~h'~i~':ho{ding'~,;d ,~ore : ci Ir'Jdo~ship: '
~ y!,vlrtue 01 : The" purchOs~r' ~~~\.;dllo'(~tlii!boatr~~nipdli ' I'ea';nlii g''/h&iih~' pr~mlses"w.j:e:
• acce"pt "the - vested-',in:': a ~ 20rnp~riy; " ~~nt'j;\1(ji;,ii~'th~I\\ t~e " vendo;'" has no title to the
, any~ o~ the o p[,emls~s. <:rhe :.vendo·r J dafrr;.s :· s·pec'lflc·: ,p~r(o rmance. ! .
.. . ldor _ claims . , Held.- tha; althou~h a ' s~lIer h;,s-'-no' 't itle at tlie :'tlme' when ' the contract
.. . :~ - - for sale is made, he may 'c omplete -his title by .procurh~g the concurrence of.
Jemls~ in' necessary ·partle..s. As the vendor, lin the given problem, was In a position to
a '-'I.c1 dl~~Jnct - compel the' company to execute the~ necessary conveyance he had a right to
no~ In the enforce specific perfor~ance of the 'contract, and the pur~haser never h~d
,Ce 91' t,b ' _ a right to repudiate. '.. '\ "
"
.,' ,. ;) . SCOPE OF SECTION 18
I plalrit'lff S: 18 embodies the result ' 01 m~ny English ca;05 o f which Woo/am v,
-0 which Heam Is the leading one and w,.b,lch. rec ognises the ' distinction between a
i~oi~in plaintiff seeking an d a defe ndant resisting specific perfo rmance. It is quite
clear from 5s. 91 and 92 o(the Ind ian EVidenc~ Act that wh en the terms
,t -up;- II)
of a co ntract ~ re reduced to writing, a pla intiff can not give oral .evid ence to
make out a 'varlation, but then tha t does not deb ar a d efendant from
lon, o e shOWing that by reaso n of fraud o r misrepresentation, the wriUng does not
In
I
I~ Its contain the true contract, he c a n, under proviso 1 to S. 92, give ora l
evi dence to prove this; ' thus It i!' tha t proof of the variati o n which Is
' eed 'to, perm itted to th e defendant and a plaintiff In that case cannot hav e a decree
een the un less he submits to the ~arlatlon , The plaintiff Is put on his election ellh..~r
ed ' into' to have his action for s pecific performance dismi ssed or nav e It subject to

;. \.;.~ ! ; -, ":.
the variation; bu t eve n If he elects not to accept the varlanon neaoe:snot .
lose his ordinary common law ' rem'edy of damages" flils Is the eHect _of S.
,c_er'ta in,..- -
IB, though in England there are dicta in some cases- to the e ffect that t he
" ~ .. SJlalnUff has no such option but to accept the specHic perform ance with a
_ . 1 -- :- va riation . The scope and principle 'of this section is disc ussed at length by
••' -.- i:1on -or To ttenham, J . tn Narain Patro v, Aukhery' Nluain thus : "5. IS does not
a pply 'unless there Is it; complete contract," It sets ' out cases In wh ich
" I .-
contracts , ~annot be enforced 'e xcept . wi~h . a variation : and ,there . are '-flve
" TITLE - p~rtJc ular , cases set ,o ut , In ,which · a contract may be enforced subject to
.. " .,~~,!ti it - l- varlatipn, such variatio n b e ing In favour of the defendant lind the section In
our opinion assum es that the parties are'" agreed as to th.e existence of the
p~n\. ~n
orce a .i. . t:o~~ract but not agr eed a s to specHi'c terms', ' The section prov ides that,
;e :'15 a when fraud or mIstake of fa ct or: mls~epre.sentati on has l~duced the defendant
". . . '. ~ "

to s ig n ao agreement, tha t agreement can only ,be en forced o n th e te rms

- 19C -
f lac, _ which th e ' defendant intended to a g re e to, Th ere is' no pro vision of law of
'perty: which we are aware which 'entitles the pla int iff to claim a variation in the
'endor - terms of his contract when he finds that the contrac t Itself cannot be
:hrl er carrl(!d out."
, good It may be n oted in c:bnncc tion with S. fS of th is Act that '55 . 91 and
r ' the 92 of Ihe , lndlan Evidence Act lay down that when the terms 01 a contr.c t
, I,;;e , \ are redyc ed to writing a plaintiff ca nno t ' give oral evi~ence to make o ut a
s- suit " variation. But those s ec ti o ns do not debar a defenda nt fro m sh OWing th at
by reason o f frau d or misrepresentation ,the writing do es n o t contain the
~ en t:;'
.., '.

---'," ... .. ..;,-" ..

. - -'.

, ,
".... -

.
 tI
b ; ', ;
f'
~'. ~!
40 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT
t:,
tt1..1,~ ~o ntract. Thus , though the defendan t resisting specific perfQrma~ce
:~ "
~ay
. . .\ give oral .evidence to show that th e written agreement does not 'express .
i if
~
. . . .
the ' re.1 terms, the pl.,Intiff c.nnot get specific perform.~1:e · with a p.rol
This rUl~- is 'embodled
.

.'
"
J
1,
.. ~!

)1 :'1
v."I.tlon,
.. . . " .
In 5, 18 ,of the Sp eCific Reliet" Ad"
,
,.. -"
. Illustrations

I Iid ,( 1. A, Band C sign a writing by which th ey purport to' co ntract each to

I
!
,; ~
'"
'eilter , Into. bond to D for Rs . 1,000. In • suit by D to m. keA, B .nd C
separately· liable each 10 the extent of Rs. 1,000 they prove that the ' wo rd
. ,

~j "each" was Inserted by mlslakej that "the i'ntcntlon was that they should give .
a. Joint bond for Rs. 1,QOO. Dean obt.ln the performance sought only with
'i
'I
the, varjatl0n thu, set up. (B.U. Dec. 75)
2. A sues B to compel specific performance of a contract In writing to
buy a dwelling-house. B proves that he assumes that the cont ract lnclu.ded
..
'I an adj.o lnl ng ~'ard, .md the con tract was so fr~ m ed as to leave It doubtful '
whether the y<l~d ' was so Included. or not. . The 'Court will refuse tu enforce
"
.'. the' ~ontract,
. 'except
. ' , with the . variation
. .
set up by B. .
·. 3. A · contracts In writing ' to let to B a wharf, together wit h a st~lp of
A -'s land delineated In map. Before ~signln9 the 'contract,- -B pro posed o rally ·
. tnat he , s hould be at li berty to sl;Jbs titute for the s trip mentioned in th e
·i contract anothe r strip of A's lan d of the same dimensions, and to this A
express ly. ' .. sented .. B th en sign ed the written contract. <I cannot
': I.' /
."speclflc performance of the writt en contrac t except w ith the variation
obtain
set by

'I .B.
f -. '4_ A.' co ntracts In writing to let a- hou~e to H; fo r a certain term, at th e
.. 1;/ . .r~nt o f" :Rs. 100 per' month, putting ~.t" ' firs t into te nantable' r·epair. · The .' .
I house tu rns out to : be not worth repairing, so, with 8's co ns e nt, . A pulls It
f· : ! ." d;'\:vn' and er~cts a ' new house In Its · place , 8 contracting ora lly to pa y rent
I,! ' :,;, at R.s : 120 per me nsem. B then sues to enforce sp ec ific pc rfo rmanc'e .ofth e
.; '. ' . contract In writing ," He ca nnot enforce It exce pt with the -varia ti o n mad e by '.
Vi . ' . '1' .~ ' . the' subsequent oral contr.ct. . .
'-
-.'-

.'
~;;~ :1 ~C£~J;. ;,l,~ " Relle/ag~!~~j parties and persqnsc/aiming under them
'.~

if)''';it.a ~ . ':C ..' , ' .; 0 .,. by ·:subsequent. :;IItl,!,~ .Except as otherwise provided , by (this
'::!ftAP"'-
;~
J !
.,
.i!.r-i: . .' .
',c :; ... . 'Chapter; ,sp,eclflc ' perforinance of a contract may be "enforced
1- t \ . " .
:'!i"
rh'P' . "l...AAIt.t)
. ., J. ' • aaa ns -
'. )'h " ~ '_. . , . .... ~, -, . - . "; !
:ii ~ ,
' ,tal either party . thereto;
:,j "' (b) .any ~th6l' ' p erson claiming under, him bi'; a title anstng .~.

~j . i' .;, .
~ub~eq,l:\eJ1t1Yt~· the~ c0ntract, ex>:ept ~. trans!~tee for y<ilue .'~

-, . ,c· .', • .' . whcLhas ' pald his mon ey in. good faith and' wit hout notice
tii il ., .;;'.';".. .
of th~ O;lgl~~J"cont~act; '
:1' " ''', . \" " ' ..:{~.' '~ny person c.l.almi.ng uncle; a iltl e which', though prlCir'to
, Ill- ')'"' the contract and 'known to the plaintiff, might have been
.~ ii .'-" displa~e<;l lby the ·defendant; · . - ,
(d) when a 'compa'ny .has, 'entered Ir.to a contract an,d subsequently
; :'
:'-
J ' i
. .'" becomes amalg~mated \vith' another " compa:ny , the ' n ~w
t:: i ( "', .~. . ., ..;:, .;.... . . "
" ~~~i ~~~>:'~~':~'~.~:~:.i:~~·~~~~~:~'~~:·.~!'):':\<~': :,.:-:'.:: .~ 'j;:>·:X·~·f;::·...:": .' ::~-:~:-::~ - ~. :" ~ ( -i :~:.: .::::--.-...-:.' '.-' .,.'j : - ;

•
 r

~. perf4rmance .frt-
l. ( r:ot :" ~~press . 7"
with a · parol
. - ·rAd·.,·
: .-" .J',t,:-"
" ,,:-,
.

. ... ~~rai:{'~a'c'h to
A; ff anq C
."'t , th~ ! word
should givo •.
hI' only with ' A contracts to co~vey ' ~ertaln .land to B by a particular day. A dies A contrlJds ~ . . ,
,.." . - Intestate before that day without' having' conveyed the land. B may compel 10 B II hOU¥ ~.
A.s hefr or other representative In' lnterest to perform the 'c ontract specifically. 10 become (~
" wrni~g -to Ihereof for ~ ~.
.ct Included . , A contracts to ' $~II certain ' lands to B for Rs . 5 ,000. A afterwards
of 14 ye.!{ (rom
.It "doubtful . conveys the' land for Rs: 6,000 to C, who has 'notlce of the original the dllie 01 the
,to. "'erif~rce contract. B may enfqrce . ·perf~rmance of the contract as against C.
. specific ~. "
SlIfe "t II .p«:::i/J«I

, :_.':'.i '" . A contracts to sell land fo B for Rs. 5;000. B takes possession of the . yeuJy rent . .A .
land . Afterwards A sells ' It to C ' for Rs. 6,000. C makes no Inquiry of 8 becomes Insolveai.:
a :Strip pf .
)sed .r · "/ly ' relating to his Int~rest In 'he 'land. "B's possession Is sufficient to affect C . Cdn A O( -A.fs'
As.signee In faso-
led ti\ .ne with notice of his Interest, ·.and he may ~nfo rce sp~cJfic performance of the
. ""ency' en(orc~ '
to', this A contract ' ~gaJnst C. .. speci fic p8.(ft;Jr-
\ot obtain A 'contracts, In consideration of Rs, 1,000 to bequeath certain of his mance 01· #It! .
;o~ . se~ by lands to B. Immediately after the contract A diel intestate and C takes ou t contrdct ? _
r:·"t'·;··, administration to his estate. ' B may enforce spe,cific p~rformance of the B.U. May 114,-
,. :.
m, ·... t -the contract against C. ~

·;alf-.:::thii'- A contracts to sell certain la'ld to B. Before the completion of th e

4 'pullr !t' contract, A becomes a lunatic and C .is appointed his committee. B .may
'. pay;rent ' specifically enforce the contract against C. (8. U. May 76; Apr. .~
:e :'drt~e ~ , '" . Illustr.ati0n,s tOi ~/.use (c) '0 \\.~
•• 'ina'de til
..-..
• :· ;:·,-,1:
~ . -:-:
. A, the tenant for life of an .estate·, ~ with remainder to B, In due exercise
of a power confer~~d by tKe settle~er;t u~der 'whlch ' he Is tenant for JHe,
. - .L '; ~'jh'f:!m : contra~ts to sell the estat~ ' to C, :' who' ha~ ~otice ' of the · 5~ttlement. Befo're
•. iy,t,'thIS;' the nile Is- completed A dies . . C may : erifor:ce 5p~clflc performance of :lhe
contr~ct against · B. . ." , __. _ .
forced ' _.
;~;nj ! ,l'" A and -8. ere Joint · tilriants of land,. his: ~nd!vlded moiety of which either
·rfJ~. · l may allen In the lifetime, . but. whi!'h subJec(to - that. right, devolves on the
survivor. A contracts ' to - s'ell his :.mo,fety to ·C and. dh~s·. C may enforce
',rlSI;, ... . specific performance ~f 'the coritratt · against : B : £xpfdin th.
' - ,: " .
IV,~I.ue .
"
' 20 . Discreilonas . to decree(ng Rf.:.!f:..m;mce.- ietf,ifffJ discretio n dnd tJJ.
powers 01 t.h~
Jotfee
...~
(I) ,The jUrisdictiOn;...~o~e~ specihCv~formance is court to c{f!!CTfie a
specIfic perfo~
discretionary; and the G.ourt is not bound to grant such 'relief . nce of II con/.r4cr
i ,·, ,
or to merely because it is lawful to . do so; but the dlsqet(on of the 'under sec. 2D. at'
b~n Co.ut,t is not arbitrary but · sound ' and reasonabl~, gUided by . th e Spedfic RMliJ
;'ki:~.. : . Act.
";1 : ' .. /
. judicial . principles ancj ·cC\paple . of correction by a Court of . B.U. Nov. 93
ently' .
-•.h~;V ._~
' .::- '. ... :.,.
,

::- ':~\;~i~ :. .:~: ... . .-:.....-.: -

.:.
:. ":'-~ ~- . --
' . .. ' ".
• . -3
 II ";:'r..' ."",
". - ...".'., ", -: . .
',> • ••

j '/ .... 42 · THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

appeal.
, -.
1 ,
' 1! ,i! ' . ,~J'~"'~'\: ~ ,. . (2) Tlie following are cases in which the Court may proPllriy ,
! ,,, '~ i~~':::~\" : .exercise discretion not to decree ' specific perf.orm'a nce- . -.
. '", '~<;Y'. # .1 (a) where the terr';s of the contract or the conduct of th~ ~
II :.j
!.
!

( :)
.: "' \'
.:.,....1. , f l~:',:,".~\
~, (jJ'"
par.t les. at the time of entering into the coniract' or ih~'
other circumstances ~nder which the contract, was entered· .'
,

. i:.'? .J
&
.. :,... \1)
.. '. Into 'are such that the contract, though not voldabfe ,-
'1/1 , f gives the plaintiff .an unfair advantage over the defen9a'nt; ,
, I . '~?~ ~: ..:. .
. :~''7f ~
or ~.
i!;1 .
, 1
,. . ~':. , '~< :~
" .. '(b) where the pe~formilOce of the contract would · Invplve "
J
i . j.
I. j: ·]\Y:.'''':.' ;' .' ',,' some hardship on the defendant . which he did not ,
.;J. ~" !..... . I.' .. foresee, 'whereas .its non-perform~nce would involve ' no
j >i
J ·i
': 6X~ :~:,~ ;~ . . "
"'''such hardship on the plaintiff; . .. . '.
! ! .~ • . . : :',;" '. ', ,~, 1 t ' (c) wher~.. the d.E!fendant entered Into .' the contract. under "
"
, .. . . \. " : II-!Y' .' '.' circumstances which though not rendering the contn.ct "
,:'
3f;;''':: ~ ' .~ voidable, makes It inequitable' to enforce ~pecific performance. ' "
..' .'.~;!,I\"'''·:' '. ;'~" ~lJ. Explanation 1. -Mere In~dequacy of consideration, or th_ '
\:j.,tii·,: ',' \rt"
~ rver,;, fact that the contract Is onerous to th e defendant or
J~. ~~,o;~ . Improvident In .Its nature, shall not be deemed to constitute an
~\. .~o,:((;. A') '. unfair. advantage within the meaning of ,clause (alor ~ardsh-'p ,
~ ~"V
'" '/
within the meaning .of clause (b) .
. .' h '" .' . pplaniitlon 2.- The quest io n wheth er the performance 91 a
I,!
contract would Involve hardship on the defendant within tf,'e'
....;., ,)0, ;.:: . : meaning of clause ' (b) shall, excep't In cases where the hardsli lp . .' -
.;:~t\\ '0
J.:~" :"';1',
~~\\, \~~ . .;"
has r~ulted from any ·act· of ' :the plaintiff subsequent to "th.e "' . ,
"

i ~\\bo;,"\' . c·:)1'tra~t, be ' determined with refer~n~e to th~ circumstan-ces .:

j
existing at: the ' time of 'the con tra'ct, :',
.. ' .•\1., .. 1
(3) The court .may properly exercise disaetion to decree "
," " ,: 28 .JJ '." ',specific perfo~mance In any case where the plalntill has " do~e.
. ',. . substantial' acts 'o r', suffered los ses ' in conseque'nce
.
of a ' ico:htract
I . ..
capable of specific performance, . ' ~, i .
. (4) The Court. shall .not refuse t6 any party' speci fic perfr rmanc
f of a contract merely " on . the ground that the contract Is "not ,

r
i , •. . ,. ".\ .~. I

1 .. -- '. " .. ,;.,.,. . -:.,'.., .' enforceable at the Instance. of other party.
'I,
..r:~~";'~~:~~~;:~. """..
1>1 .." •. ,', ,," ' . " '. PRINCIPLES FOR GRANTING .;
SPECfFfC PF.:R~ORM~NCE
//

I -.: . . ~nd . PCWti'~" 01

C~urt: ': ':. "! ' 1" .
The claim for a decree for specific perfo rm ance of J ~ontract is not a
matter of right, and ' therefore ' the ' Court 'is not bound ,' to grant specific
. E\.U.. 'Nov; 82 . p'erfo~~ance merely because it 'Is I ii\, , 'ul to do so. In ever y suit for specific
.~

.'
.. .. "' _._..l.__"::. .

. "
 ,

SPECIRC 'PERFORMANCi / OF ·c6NTRACTS ·... 43 . . '

',. I ~ '~. '
performance; : the
.
Courf:'hzls :t6,': ~Jan~l{a~;:._~h~ther ;'·~· ::·tlle<ei~¥~i$\~·: }j/l:;itS ')' Djs~~ the. nl1turef~
.. . .... .. . .. ," . -. ,_.. . ' I .. . . . . _.
dl~cretlon·. \the.~ :~'gr~ement . ;Is· ~.: ~:me ~wh.lch:<oug~t ::.to·' : be, ~sp.~c.lf.lc~:lhhenforced > .the seop'l! and
havIng rega'r,d ..to, ,the 'f~~t . ~h~~~~jhe7~'nfordng -of--:: the' -(~c?l}~r.a .c;:t iwoul4: J.~~t :. ' extent of the . dis~..
'. lay prop.erly InlU.t qJo(glnlqrv ,uPo'(LQi;i!!fl'nde!}t;tha,n' confer;. benefit , uR<>n. Jh~ " pla,l.nUf{ . . , cretionary. powers
- ince/; ' The : .cond~St,cf.f,~: ~.he. ;~r.t¥; :a'p'pl~!~~l~r; ' flle l)r,~11,~f }.! " al~aY:~~ :_~.D . ·~rp.p~~a~t ' ;:a~t:: d:O;:;: !o~
, ~ ' :luc~of the el~ment for consideration. '. ,.:, ' - ' ~,,:;., ~ :.... specific per/or-

t act' or the _It is to ' be noted, howeve,r , ~,at_ t~e :rt:;lief lies In the :';d~sc~~tion , of the mance,
Coull only In so. far as It must neces,s.1!JIiy Ju~ge whether ,und"" the, p~~nces B.U, Apr. 80
pas 'entered of , the case, the ca.ntract Is or !s: "not ,.equltable ofl:e. 'but ,If It ,.is,:qeterinII}ed . Oct. 81
tvpf:iahle, that the cpntract is falr.and reasonabfe; a'nlthal the ' conduct"oi 'the plaintiff
defendant;
- . ".
has not been unreason",ble, there Is'
no . :roo~ for the , ~pplic'ation of judltlal
discretion, ThUS! J£ the contract is - certain! unambiguous, not obtained by
misrepresentation! Imposition ' oj; su~pdse, not an un~onsclonable ' or 'hard _
lid inyolve bargaini and such that it; performance will not be opnressive upon the
! dfdnot _defendant! and c~pable of speciJIc execution through a decree of Court, it
must be spec!flcally enforced.
nvolv.e no
Aithough decreeing specific performance is within the discretion of the
Court, It does not know ' that the Co urt .can arbitrarily or 'c apriciously
~c( ·r'der enforce one contract and refuse to enforce another. The jurisdiction is to
~ ·cor..u'act be exercised on well~knawn prlndples. The discretion Is said to be judicial Discuss Mth e
:for~ance. and the Court is to have regard to the contract Itseli. As Story puts It : Min powers of the
~. , ', . '- ; . . ., truth th~ whole exercise of thiS' whole branch of equity Jurisprudence Is' not court in g UJnti,!g
I;' : o't 'Jhe a matter of right In either. party but is a matter of discretio-n In the .C!.?urt- the decree lor
";'. '~' -"'.
specific periormd-
n'dar'lt ·br . .
not Indeed of arbitrary and capricious discretion dependent upon the mere
" ...", ,,
nce is discretio-
.. , an
;tlhite pleasure of the judge but of that sound a.nd reasol)able discretion which
\.'~ '- nAry~. Std le i h«
governs .itself as far as it may by general rules and principles, but at the
ha,Elshlp n/ltUrll, scop e and
, . -.. , . .. l\"
.',":,S: ;.. -
same time, which withholds or grants relief accorqlng to the circumstances
of each partlcula.r case, when these rules and 'prlnciples will not furnish any
ex ten t
power,
of th /lt

Inc'e~iClf 'it exact rne Hsur~ of justice between '-the parties." B.U, Apr. 89
: . ' '. thfn~ :tbe' In a recent case, it has . be~n held by ' the Supreme Court that, the
The powers of -t~e
'-" " har$hfp' . ;. Jurisdiction to decree specifiC p~;fot:m,anc.e . ls a discr~uon~ , one ~n~ the
court in a suit filed
,"?UI t .Is iNt bOUnd to grant re~lef . merely . 6~ca.use _ft · Is lawfyl .ta do $0.
" ." •to/ the However, as can , be seen . from th~".. sectlo!'l itself.- th~ discretion is not
under Specific
. . ?~t!~~C~ arbitrary but sound and reasonabl.: "nd guided by Judicial ' prinCiples and Is
Re/lef Act ~re
discretiontlry .
. ) (;/~ !=apable df c'orrectian by a Court of :_Appe~I: ~ (Sarqar Singh" v. Krishna DevJ~ Discuss.
•cie~'ree (1994)'·2'-S.S.J. 2371. '
. ~ -
" " ~ ...:,.; . '. ' . '. . , . )l.U. Oct 85
is 'd~ne The hardships Illustrated 1~ ···Sub'secs.. (1; and (2) pf sec':' 20 aie not
e.xh.";sllve. ISoIYM,,"yon v. ~ Rao.. AIR 1965SC 14051. Thus, where II
:~h.< . t ~as (qund that the house agr€ed to b~·:.sold was ' the only house of an ~ged

(~~~:h ~~'
couple and ' since the husband had' died a' ' few months' after the agreement,
It was the only properly left wIth ·the. widow wIth whl ~h :she could eke out
. Is " n'ot ' her IIvilihood . Whereas : the plaintiff (buyer) was a businessman who ' owned
another house ,and' a shop. It was'· held that In view of th'e hardship involved
to the'- Window the suit for specHic performance should be dismissed and tr. ')l"\~'"
the purchase money alr~dy paid was. directed to be refunded . l.lldngandyakamnM .\ , :.,
v. Govinda Noroyan AIR 1983 kant. .2641, .
.' 's 'n ot a .Cohen v, Nessdole Ltd., (1981) 'Alf E.R , 118:':": In ··thls case It was held
)(.\ \-, ' "
.\'1''')':
specJilc that n6 order for specific; . p~rformanc~ can.' be glven .. where the .contract is a U.,'2

. ..
_' " .
., '. spe~~fic
' . - .
'.
~- ' .
'.
~" .

.. '
 :r ,
".

44 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

, li::(, cOfldltional one, e.g., where it.is "Subject to contract" .

;- .Sub-sectlon .{1} '~ f this section lays down the ger:-eral principle stated .,"',
above. It can be, analysed as follows:- ' "',

. -.
".
".~' ' ,'.!";:
Ci} the jurisdiction of decree ' of specific performance is discretionary; '.
:;
. .... .~ ~:.. " ".. :,,,,':,'; : ~. .; ~ ," . (ii) the Court is not boun4 t~ grant such relief merely b~caus e it 1,<;
•
, ' . .:, -~
'.'-:• '". '.,O J '-. .,',".1.<,," lawful to do so. ' , ,. '
.::. A,..~nd ~ .u.jolnt; This principle laid down In the section Incorpor~te~ the' doctrines 6f ' equity
: :.: 'O~U$;~IA Udj$po, of En"glish Law. The: Courts of Equity would not enforce all remedies wHich ."
.' '· SI.S~"$-·. . B ~nd were' permiSSible under law. They would take "in consideration sev'eral other
14ku 4fJ(c/ul/v. po- factors to. exercise their discretionary jurisdiction, The principles that would
:: ... ssesslon. :_B 'do.s : .~ .
guide their discretionary jurisdiction were the following
. ;'~t.':/I!,!:· ; ~ ~ sult : ':
. within · 6 months " ' (a). he who seeks equity must do equity . •
10; restdr*'tJ~n 01 (b) " he who comes to Cour.t of Equity mus t come with , clean
·PosSflssion.:.:.: ~ts~ H h~nds , .
8 dis~~~es' A.
A" SUBS ' 70r .xciv- (c) delay defeats eqUity.
" SI:VB : posse.ss/on (Iii) the discretion 'of the Court is not arbitrory, but sound and reasonable .
.from ' B within ' 6 .
. (i,vi ·.the ,d iscretion is gUided by judicial principles , and
' '''~nth.. Will .A
siCf,s ed ? .\.::. . .~ .~ (v) the exercise of discreti on- Is capable of correction by a Couri of
. "',, S.U, . N~v.•. ~2 ' ,~ppeal. .
.;. :. .~ ; ; ~ The maxim of equity- ·he who seeks equity must do equity", ha~ th ~
~.: ,", . . . ,.'. ,. foll!Jwi.Qg Jmplications:- ,. "
". f" I : """ ', ..,\' _ .
.. :.. <.. . ... ,~ (1) ', a party seeking to obtain an equitable remed y must stand in conscien~ous
,: I ' relatlons · to~ards his ' adversary: " I.

(2) 'the 'transaction from' which his claim arises must be just a'nd f~ fr" in
Its terms: "
opp~essil;e hard upon 'the ,def~~d~~t. .
•'.,-l
J' '(3( the relief 'its elf ,must nof be ,?f
< i
(4), th e .r~,I.lef must ,be , so modified and shaped as to ,recos,nlsc, pro,teet
f~
J "
,'. ;:·,; ;~'n{:,~·nforc.~.' ·th~~ ~.efenda'nt's rights arisiQg from ' the same, ~u,~~'e,~t.,
, i
~atter, 'a.s· ~ell\, as those r (nhe.rlng In the plaintiff.
,i I J,
! : 1 k Trye ~ec..on·d ,. [r."I~,I~ ·.·X6' ~j1(~' l:~ome~ to squliy 'must come . P-lilh.,,.c/i;!an .
:f hlJnc!s/~ I,mplies t,hat the plaintiff must not only hiSve a I,~gal claim but ~ also
,;
"
tj
.J,:,.':. '"." .•
hl~ con~,uctmust b~ fair and free from blemishes.
Th'e third maxim' "deldY defeats equity': must be carefully note'd , Del~y
"..! ;

..under this ,maxim Is not ' the delay as understood under the 'Law of Umitation,
I, ' Th~ , L~w ~f l:imltatlon ~x'c 'ept in ve ry few limited ' circumsta~c~s do:e~ ' n;t
! I
; gi ~e . any' discreti9n a.nd it" bars the remedy. But the doctrine of ~elay or
lach ~~ In ,equity would melln very much different.
r Delay : The third prl'n ciple that regulate's the ' dis...:retion of the court in
I
grantil'19 ,specific ' performance of a:. contract is reflected in the maxim or'
i!, , equity " "delay defeats ,equity". Delay under this mpxlm is not de.lay as •
understood under the law 'of limitation , Under the law of limitation, the '
ij
I , ",," particular period is ' pres~ ribed and generalfy·,- 'afrerih'erapse-~'. time,
! .... , ttre---reine~6arre(f.-BUt·-· under ' the , doctrine of de lay or laches , the •
,i ;' .
iI';
'-,'
•. ":."r:' . poSitlo.n .. isdii fer;;;'i~ Laches is not the mere delay but it is a delay, that , ,
j

iJ{.9r"~s ..~isad.van,tages to 'the defenddnt. Ge:1.~rally. so long as the p ~"ties are

I '( "" ~ :"., '"
ij ;;
!. -.: ...;:~ : :.~ . .' ,. "
..: .
I" .;., . -
....
!
'

~,
".
'-. i::
, . , 1, .. , j r."f~li;;!
-J:
:,: . ~.~ '.'

' f"
1 "-
~

I-
Ii.
,i
 , .:,)"

~. . _ ,. ' _ ... _ ~. '~ '_" I 1, .

i"
.:! I., ... .,,: . -"
"45 '
" . ' _ ¥'

, ' ....;, SPEC!F1C : PERFORMANCE'''OF CONTRACTS ' , ..

i'
:;'~>,
prim::iple s ta ted
,- . -,in~'th'~ s'~~ e~ ;~~~~~fi'ti~~~~ilJ~/~fle~$'~ I;~~'e! ~~~ih~1-:!b~n~e: ~~-~~~~ _~ Verii~dy'; pr~~pil~
, ·: D~·'\ifieti'om.· a'laV;I'i.ilthln'''Oimlt;iliow'e'd'b'Y' I~IiI:''Bu'il(felayl:ifn',' thi'parCof ,
the 'plalntlff may "work" fci' tlie 'llil:iaciJa'iltagii', 6Pih1;o :~~f~ha',"Ffde; ~;.:riO';:'s
'. ~iscfo,lJ o""ry;
• j rea'sons. l]t ,' ~:Y .biJthat':,there11~!:IO~~: .. ~{ ~1~e~cQ~~-there: 'may. i":be · chan'ge of
" betaus'e It ' is .. iltle' and\ lntervention of equity . 'In , su~h ~ases 'negligence on the part of the
'.
plalntJf(·"!-.iould 'cause InJury · to~ th-e de'fendant, ! therefore. the cou~ mllly ·dehy
i'in~~'~ f
einedles 'WHich
1 sl!v"e<'ral other "
Jes'.l.th'at wou]d .
equity any :rellef. (Chose v. ' Chase, ?7, i\O." 804)., ' , '"
It should be noted' that 'th~l" doct;ln'. of delay or laches Is not an
', arbitrary or a technIcal '~octrln'~. It Is generally based on the follOWing
" '
I "
.~ :
.. .. :'
~\

:; .J ;,. •.

'. J;:". t.~

I ~, ,., con~lderaUons:- . " . ',' r< ' • • ' .

'" . 'll _ Firstly, 'such delay 'on ;'ihe 'part of the plalntlff , mlght fairly be regarded
Zl$ .'equlvalent to a waiver or -'an ' abandonment of the right. Such waiver .; ': ~

e with , clean might operate as an estoppet: ' ,_ . .

Secondly. the plaintiff's condud- a~d neglect may put the other party in
a situation in which it may , not be reasonable to place . hlm 1£ the remedy
d reasonable. was asserted in time, -Any ' further principles ' of delay are not based on the
.... statute of limitation. .
, The· follOwing factors must be taken into consideration, while deci·ding as .. ....
·t of . to whether the .delay bars the rell)edy or ,not. The principles are as follo ws:-"
(at the length of the delay, and
Iy' ~. p,a~ ,the (b) the nature 'of the .Ct ' done during the interval which might affect
: !" . ', ".': . either : party and cause. a oalance of justice or injustice in takjng one
:onsclentious course or the other (Lindsay Petroleum Co, v. Hurd (1873) 5 P,C,
221),
. ~'n(l-fafi'ln Mere lapse.of time cannot be said to operate ·as laches , and It Is the
:--1.",1;: !~ -
inferen·ces which ar~ reasonably deducible from it which are material, because
: . ... ~ r·· . .
:defeOdanl. ' a ·pa;tY~ has obViously the . right· tei.· lay his claim within the period of
',".'~,; JI . 'I. ~_
limitation prescribed by law so long as· adverse inferences cannot be reasonably
se, .protect deduced from the, delay, : ' '
:' -l~:~~~Nct.,
', .. , ,, . .. • ! ;
. The below mentioned are the three cases in which the Court may
;··f ·:;F ! l .... : ,"
properly exercise di~cretion n~t to decre~ spec"lfic performance. The circumstances
_ fJ,/ith.; -.cJf!an
• n :b'1, ~Iso . stated below are illustrative and no1 exhaustive. .
, (1) 'Wher~ ' the tenms of the, cont'r aet 'or the conduct of the partIes at the
11..:-,;, : J :\~' ' 1.
:ed;: Delay time of entering Into the contract or to the other circumstances under which
Jmltatlon, the contract was entered into are isuch that the contract, though not VOidable,
: doe.~ .' ~~t gives the plaln~ff an unfair 'adva~tage, over the defendant: S, 20(2)(a),
' :d~i;., , or . IIJu.strations
-.' ..' (a) A, a tenant for lif~ "of a certain property. assigns his interest therei n
·court in to B. C contracts to· buy, and B contracts to sell that interest. Before the·
laxil;, of ~ ·contract Is . complet~d . A receives a m~rtal injury, from the effects qf whi c h
-jelay ' as he dies the day after the contrZlct Is executed . If Band C were equally
Jon, ' the ' ignorant or equally a':Vare of the fact, B is entitled to specific performance
:h: time, o.f the fontract. If ·8 k~1ew the fact and C did n~t, spe~ific performance of
'e:!; ( the . the contract should be · refused to 8 .
lay.: that (b) A contracts to sell to 8 the Interest of C in certain stock·in·trade· it
:tIes "
. ... .. .a're: " Is stipulated · that the sale shaH sta·nd good even though it should turn ~ut
...., . :~~..{;;;..;:: .-::, . ..:.
that C's i~te~est Is worth nothing . In fact, the value of C's interest depends

., ..

I
-.
.~ -

orj ~-:' . ' " \.

l
:.,\.
" .
.............
. ~
.

.
:.
-
..
46
... ..:. THE SPECIRC RELIEF ACT
.. :

on .the ;~:it~f~r1~'PartnershIP accounts on which he is heavily In debt ~ .

10·. hl.' partners. This Ind.btedne;~ Is known to A, but not to B. Specific
p,uformance.", .. of ..the
. .
contract should be refused .""-.
to A. ' - --'", 1 '"
.. ' . .. <'.
' .. (c) A contract~ to.,.sell, and B contracts to buy <:ertaln l.nd, To pr6teot
the; land from .noods, ·it is ~ecess'a~, for its owner, to maintain an .expensiv~ " ~" ,;~
. ~.mbankrLlent. . B:. d~e.s· not kn'ow of this circumstances and A conceals it ~.:
/rom him. Specific perform.nce of the contract should be refused to A. ' "
(ll, U. June.14 ~nd Nov. 80·.nd Ocl. 84)
.. - "
.,' (0) A '$ property Is put up to allction. B requests C. A '$ attorney, to bid
. for him. C does this Inadvertently and in good faith . The persons present,
~eelng trye vendor'.$ .~ttorney .biddlng, think that ne
is a mere puffer and
~ease ~o 'c ompete: the "lot Is knock~d down to B a! a low price. Specific •
. . perform.nce of the conir.ct should be ' refused to B. (B. U. Ocl. 73 dIlO···
. .:
,.:
'."- , ',
Apr. 80) Ci, " .

; ... I :, ..
:.': ': ' '
~ (~) Where th~ ·. perrormance of the contract would In~olve sOJ'!le hardship'
,on ,the defend'~-nt, whJch "he did ' not fo resee, whereas its no n-performance
.;
, - ....: " '" .' .woul(lnvolve no $!-ich.' hardship 011 the . plaintiff, '
(~) Where the defenda~t .eQtered Into the co~tract und er circumstances.
'.". '

/
wl. lch. though not rende~lng , th~ contract vOi dable, makes It ·In eq ultable to
. '.
.
, '
enforce specific performance .
.:i·:- , "

" ." ': :.: Exp1an4t1on 1 ..""Mer(i'lnadcquacy of consideration or the mere

'. '
facUhat the contract Is onerou; to the defendant or Improvident .in
Its nature, shall not 'be deemed to co nstitute an unfair advantage within'
the m~n l ng of CI. (a) or hardship within the meaning of CI.(b). .. i

, 'Exp!anatj~n 2 . ~The... question whether the · p~rf9rmaric;~ of a ...

. cont~a~t would ' in!Jolve hardship on the ' defendant within the .'~ ;
. ' _ ' . If' ..
meaning of CI. (b) shall ; except in cases where the hardship. .. .. ,., -. '

:.: . . has . .resulted · from any .act . of .:the plaintiff subsequent .. to ·· the . ~\
,. .. .. co'ntract,' be determln~d ' with' . reference to the .clrcum·s tances
existing at the. time 'of the contr,!ct : S.· 20(2) .
.I/Iustratfons -'i
-~

'(~) ' A Is .'entltled to some la nd under his father's will. on condition' that, ' '.'
;, .':
.r: ... if .he sells it with·ln . tW,ohty-fi";'· ye.rs , half the purchase: money .hall go to . ,
i
.
B. A forgetting the condi~lo n contracts, before U:te' .expira·Uon of th~ twerty-. I
" five years, to' sell ,th~ land ·to C. Here the ' enforcement 'o f ·th e contract- :1
wouid ~perate so , harshly on A' that the Court will, not 'compel Its ~peclflc
, '. ...,. ~
:pe;formance In favour 'of C. . . . .. . .. '
.' M;.j· and B trustoes,-joln their benefiCiary, ·c, in .a ' contr~ct to ~eil the
.
estc1t~ to ~, and persol"\aJiy agree to exonerate the 'e state trom heavy '
'. :
'trUst
encumbr~nces ·to~ ·w.hlch It Is subject. The pur.chase money Is not ,. ~.ea~ly
enough to discharge thc;>se' 'en'cumbranc~t tho~gh at the date of the conttad
the vendoz:s believed It to be sufficient. Speci fic performance of the ·contract
should be refused to D. .. ' . '.
'. (c) <'1. the bwner of an es tate contracts, to sell it to S, and sti pula tes .:
,; ",.
..'. ·... . ;.. th.t.:he.. ' (AL
. shall not be obliged
. ' , , ' .... . to define Its ' boundary. The .. t.to · .. ally ,
"

I!
!
r -
 SPECIRc?,PE!U'ORMAt-lGE ;:OFCONTRACTS 41
. .... . . :. . ' (:: ~:_\.'~t.~.:~.:: .:".;.,. :._.., .':'...·:,:f.'>,.. ;.,: . . . \
:coTPr!ses ' a\ialuabJep.to~e~in,~t J~~u.:~ ' to ;eJtl,l~rA~be!rart : ~llt. Specific .
hea'(iJy in . debt
to _. 8 ... "oeciflc
't ~. ~~~9':'~~~P~(·. 0 J.:~e l,~<?p,.tr~S~J~~~~~~.:.~.~, r~L~td:).~~ ~~ .~!~~ ~~~: ~W~. ~~.I, ~.. "~" .

, . - - ! . .i~~i.;tpt'¥?~~~~H~~~.f.!.{!I';W.·j ;' f:t~fi~~;)(:;~·:}~ f i'~·(~:~ ;.~. ,:{;·?'~·\.~.:~H·::.UL ,t;di~~· i ~'i '.; !.~~:
, ~~ :- " ,"l ldl ' '.. contracts wltl) ,·8 ,to" sell "h!1Jl ,i;,ertaln ' Iand,\~an~to ' make . ,.r.oae!., to
rod, _7" pr6tect lit: .h-o'rri ~~.; ~ertil~ .r~liwiY'":~'~tJgri:;;·rr~jf,i5U~d'. t~~~;jhat'A· c~'~no( m~~e
.... n ao ~xpensjve th''; road ';"li~~ut expO'sirirhiins';j(ib'lllfg'tion : spei:\li~ peiformitnce of the .
""(I • A 96nc;eals It part ·,.o f ·, the contract ',relaUng:' to" the " ~Q.d··should ··b.. ·.ref\1sed io Beven
.:; re~us ed to A . .
.-
,.
though It .may ' beheid I,hot :h' .Is entltled i to specltlc p';;formance of the reat
with compensatlo~ f~r loss of, the ~ ro'd, ,'., ' . . '. ' ,', .. , '
..
hcirQ!~U:; 'to ,bid (e) 'A; a 'lesse~ of min~~. contr~~t; with B, his . Jesso;, at any time during
rsons present, "the ' c~ntlnuance " of the · lease. ' B may give n~tlce of his deS'l re to take thp.
re .,.puffer..' and machinery and plant used , In a~d about th'e mines and that he shall have
". ~, -

lrlce. rSpecJflc the articles specified in the. notice delivered to him at a valuation on the
q~t: 73'and a
expiry of the' lease." Such cor tract· might 'be most Injurious the le;see's to
'buslness and s pecifi c: performance of it should be refused to B.
?~e hardship' (I) A contract~ to ' buy certa'in land from B. The contract is ' silent as to
-p~~formance acc ess to the land . No right of way . to It can be 'shown to exist. Specific
performallce of the contract should be refused to ' E, (E, U. April 73, May 76.)--
ircumstanc es (g) A contracts with B to buy fro m B 's ma nufacto ry. and not elsewhere "
leqy.J( ~ to all the goods of a c ertain class used by A in his trade. The Court cannot
. .; - ' .;
compel. B . to supply the goods , but if he docs not supply them, A may be
r· th~ 'mere . ruined unless he Is allowed to buy the'm elsewhere. Specific performance oJ
the' contra.ct should be refused to B : .5 . 20. .
'ovldent In
age Within, . The' follOWing Is a case In which the Court may properly exercl.s:e
discretion to decree specific perform a~cel vlz.-
I
'.:
(hr..: i .""
~· "'... The ~ourt. may properly exercise discreUon to. dec'r':!e specific performance
lri~e: 'PL a in any case where the plain ti ff has ' done substantial acts or suffered losses
'. Ithin,~~the a
In consequence of contract capable of speclfi~ performance.
ha~d~hl'P,
, .:. ;;,.;-
The Court shall not refuse to any ' p~ rty specifiC performance of a
contract merely on · the ground that the co~t~act · l.s not enfor~~ble at the
~ -
" , . t,: to~' !I\'e .
Instonce of the other party ', 5, 20(2), . (3) imd '(4).
l)st~~ces , ., ' .> .. ~

Illustrations
-~,~ :.
·A sells .land to a Railw~y ' Company • . wh~ ' ~ontracts to execute certain
",

1..:
)Work for his convenience. The company takes the land and uses It for the'ir
" tion Hiat,
rallw~y. Specific perfomance of the contract should be decreed in fa vour of
aU' go to'· A. (E. U. Dec. 74)
, . twenty'
c:ozy- ~t ~ .- Po we' .. e{;satton in 'certain cases.-(l) In a
sp'et. ,'i~ -" " :~ s~IHor .·specific performan ce of a contrac, IntHf may
I, ./
also claim compen satio n for Its breach, either In add ition to, or

n
'eii the
"heavY i.
In sutistltution of, such performance, ,
~ :~ne~rly
(2) · If, In any such ,suit, 'the Court 'decides thai specific
!
:o~'~r~ct Performance ought not to' be granted, but that there Is' a contract
:oittract betwe<;n the ,parties which has been broken by the defendant,
-;.- - un ' the plaintiff Is elltitled to compensation for that breach,
. I' .
pulates · 'I! 'shall award compensatIo n accor ingly,
:r¥Hy " •
~ ... . ,' , .'•.~; .. ' ","'.

- .-.
, - :.;

. -

I
. L _ __
 - -. - - _ .. . -. . _
" ,
...•. , _ . ._----._- -_.. _--.. __.- ------ - ..

48 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

, ' .'
fi (3) If, in ~<Iny ~uch 'sult, the Court decid!!s that specific ~.
,..
,-:..

~,
·performan·ce ought· to be granted, but that it Is not sufficient to
..
, I

:-:~
satisfy the JiJstice ~f the case, and thaI some compensation fo~.·~ · .
:. " ~reach of the contract should also be made to the plaintiff, If '
i :_
shall .aw<3rd him su~h compensation accordingly, .. .. -; ,," ••
'.
,I .· ' .. .'(4) In detimnlnlng the alt)oun'! of any' compensation awarded .

I! und~r this section, the Court shali be guided by the principles "
sp.eclfied In Section '73 of the Indian Contrac't Act, 1872, . : •
,,
I
," (5) . No compensation shall be awarded und~r this ' secti on
,unless .the plaintiff has daimed such compensation i.nhls plaint:
I'
Pr,ovided that where the plaintiff ha s not claimed any su ch "

I,. . .";:,'
' . }::., \ :.:: '
compensatIon In the · plaint, . the Court shall, at any st~ge f<\1'
the proc.e eding, allow him to amend , the plaint on such terms,
a,s ma·y. be just, .for Including a claim for such compensation .
. . . - .'x. .,4n ';.·.. uthor ' · ' . explanation. -:, 'The ci~cumstances .tnat file contract has become

i{Ii :..• f.•~,~~,kiP:'.~tp/Q.~'~~.(:.~,':._,l_~. ~r·.~,..;~u. ~r :j:~~:£~Z:~::~:~~~;:;:~:::,:d:~2~~'::~~:o:o:::

I

:,;.tr.:,f . .••
!. :' , r ~ ~' .... _/I J~ g'r ant ' compensa't lon . If they refused to decree specific performa.m;~· of a '
j ': . '', .r. : ....,. can X'4nrorce the contract. Only after the passing .
of the judicature Acts, the ;~me ,
Co~rt
, \ ' . -could grant damag'es either in addition to or in substitution· of such performunce .
. " c;",/nd. 1. ':If
. w&1 will h, the
so; .
However, In India , the replaced Specific Relief Act under Section 19 could
_·.p.tur6
01 · the award compensation (or breach of a contra:ct ' either ' in addition' to or in , .
' .... ..,~ " ' ~... :' . _ substitution of specific' perform~,"!ce, The sam~ pri nciple Is contained In th~"('Jt_

" Q.q. .Apr. 85 present section.

'. -} . :-
'. .. ~ Sub-se~tion (2) of this section provides that whe n the ·Court d e~ides­
tha t- the specifIc p'erformance of .~ contract Is not to be granted and yet , ~
.
,

-
'.

there Is a breach of contract, It may 'award compensation'. This is illustrated ~

...
by the decision of th~. Su.preme Court in Kaly~npur Lime Works v. St6te of
, .
.... . . :Bihar, 1954 A.I.R. S,C., 165. . . ., .
\ .
,. .\ ·The · ~rincipl~ . I.~ ld d~wn · insub·section
(3) is illustrated by' the following~'
;.
'\4 contracts ,.vith
B· to . sell him a house for Rs. 1,000 the price . to be
paid \nd the possession given on the 1st January, 1877, A fails to 'po,iorm
.-j his . p~rt of the contract, and B brIngs his suit for specific performance and
. "' . :" /( ." .c~~.P~~,~ ·tI~~, ~hl~h ~s> decide.d In . ~IS ' favou,~ cn. the lSt Janu~r~, . 18:8~
-:. ' . 1 The decr,e e may, ~Ides ~rdering .speclflc performance, aw~ard to B ~o.mpensatlan ......
'for any loss which he has sustained by A's refusal. . : .. , .
; ·The -explana·tip~ ,to
this secti~n , ma~es it.sl~Hha ellen where· specifi~- -. •
I'~rfonllanl'e .ts 1111po:ssi~le,~plalritlff~m.y be entitled to" compensaUor..
Ho",":,~ver, he s.h~IL not··oe- entitled to such compen-s ation. If he has . hlms.elf
mad.e, bj!...11is-~oWo: act the sp.ecific . performance of th.e cqntract impossi ble. •
._.. - ... _. -_. ·Thls'l'-ilnclple may be Illustrated by th" follOWing instances ,
'. (l) A, a purchaser, sues B,· his vendor for speci fic performance o f a,contract-
. , .. ... ; •. for sale :of ~ pate.nt. Befor·e th e hea·ri ng .of the suit th e patent expires. The Court

LJ~
._.,.-:--- --,. -.

. .
 , ~'I

.," , " ..... .. .. , . ;. ! .• .. ~, · .~:r~~:' ~.~-,',.,·· ..,-.:;> .. "'- I .;"

... .. ' SPECIFIC>' PERF6~MANCE :6F : CONTRACTS . 49 : "
.' . ' '. .,! , . . . .. . , ',

, . that ~speciflc
.:i': " : irl1~y"~~a;rd A c6'~~JA;at"iontorLth;'~~'~i';~;;r~~'~~n~e ~or til: .contr~~t·~~d ~aYI' lf
",
, ' ~ 8h'c eSs atY;'allow:hi "',i", ' ~';;';iid ;the, p'l~ Iri t ).o~;.ih. t purPos .:'; '.'i0:~ ~'I.! ) .
sufflcl~nt to ,';:;'1fI 'lci (2ji ii\,,;J& 'it!fhli~r ..p{glfi~1ij;~;i~;in\iri~~ ;oi~'r.':c;luHci';' :pa~s~aC brth~ ,
nsaflon for ' ; , :'li(DIfectors1i()/ ; i~ pbblicht:Ij,-m'j}~ilYfiu~li~#li-h!chhe 'w;O. ,
:~ntitl.d 'tti:"h',~' •
'ici!nr'lff, It ~: ,' ?-;r6erfa'h':·.numb'er: of1 ~'tiareS.' allotted ··t6··:hi~" arid ' for compensation (or the non·
, perform. nee 'of the , resolution., ·i\II'.the shores h'od been ' .lIotted' before the
Institution of the suit. The ¢&ut.~aYI ~nder this ' sectfoh. aviar4 A compensation
lon; 'aw~rded ' .lor.J he non-p~rformance. } -,.:':,','''.; ~" r
<
" ' . .
• ;~1-;I~ciples " '@ Power to'::grant"reJief for possession, partitIon, refund of
'18lL: . earnest money etc.- ' '
.: : 'j "
. " . ; . '. I -:.:-~ .
thts': section' ,.0) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in S'o1.e
1 hls"plalnt: ,
,· the Code of , Civ!l ..Procedure, 1908, any person suing for the 1~
,d 'a ny such specific performanc'e of a ' contract for the transfer of Immovable Cf'if '
ystage for property ,may, in an appropriate case, ask f.Jr-
,
~~.v~1
. . ,. .",'
~'.

mch, ',terms,
'

(a) possession. or partitions and separate possession, of t,he

r~'· , . d
• • J . ' , ....
'ensation. property , in addition to such performance; or , J' ()o/'. "

j~ i 1,. come
:. . . ,::-L.c:.;.!(".•\.~. : . .\ , ,'"
(b) any other relief to which he may be entitled, Including the
I 'me -':ourt refund of any earnest money or deposit paid or made by
\ioo" :" "
f: "t,;" , '
'Y could not
'him, In case his claim for specific performance is refused.
(2) No relief under clause (a) or clause (b) of sub·sectlon (1)
:~~,~~~. 'o,f ; a' shall be granted by the Court unless it has been specifically claimed:
,;.!~~~: Provided that, where the plaintiff has not claimed any such
. . . .1"9: cl;{~ld
or( , ~,
. relief In the plaint, the Court shall, at any sfage of the proceeding,
on ~ t()l 'or
In allow him to amend ' the plaint on such terms as may be just
.Ineq In d lJe , for Including a claim for such relief.
.', . 4~ . i.irt~ ·de/fde;- (3) The power of the Court to grant relief under clause (b)
- • . "- I . ,
:ed ! ~pd yet of slib'sectlon (1) shall be without prejudice to its powers to
• 5 IllUstrated award ,compensation under · Section 21. ·
.' V. Sldl~ of @ liquidation of damages not a bar to speCific performance.-
.. ,.
"k)lloWI~g: (1) A contract, otherwise proper to be specifically enforced;
. rT).a~ •. be so ' enforced, though a sum be named In it as the
'ric~ : J.o ~e
to,', p ampunt to ' be paid in the case of its breach and the party , in
default Is wliling to pay the same , if the Court, having regard
,io the terms of the ' c'ontract 'and other attending circumstances.
:.'Is satisfied that the sum i.vas ' nam,ed only for ' the purpose of
s"curlri erformance of .the , contract and not for the purpose
, re:'speclfic
pen:satlon. of 'glvlng to the party In e ault an o ption 0 paying money in
os himself ,lieu
. .of. specific performance. '.. ' ~
Jf: ' I' I , .
npossibte. (2) When enforcing .speclfic performance under this section,
";'1' ) : ':::
the Court shall not also decree ' payment of the sum so named
a:6fH,tr'~d In , the contract.
... rhe C6i:irt
SR-4

,,' ----------- - - - -- - -- -- - - -
 ,

.'
- - -- , -- - , ' .. - > -, .. , ..

'. ,if
. r.'
", I ~
'
1"
I ii
,
50 mE SPECIFIC REUEF ACT

Illus/rations
"1: I ,
t~
1': !il ~

, I I
: " ;

, I

1
I,' ·f- :
, .'t,i
"

J" ~
•
. !' .: '
...
,
,
,,
} "

:. i '
. (' ~ .

' , ' j: ;-. ~.'

> -:.) ,

1he principle of this sectIon" applies /0 Injunctioll as well.- Thu s, It was

decided In Madras RIy, Co, v, Rust, i1891) 14 Mad, 18, Ihallf a cas e be a prop er
. one for an InJunction, the fact that the co ntrac t con tain s a provision for a penalty
..fo!, Jts non-performance Is no bar to the g ranting of an injunctlo:1. .
Even If a sum Is named In a con tract for the sale of Immovable
property as the amount to be paid In case of breach and the purchaser Is
willlng to pay It, the vendor c~n. nevertheless, Insi~t on the specific perlo~ance
of the ,:ontract provlde4 that the contract Is othen.l,lise proper to be speci fically
enforce~. . '

~ A" Instilut", 24, Bar o[.swt for breach after dismissal of suit for specific l
'I'';
,", " suit > >

Os4/nsiBoniY lor
,
!Mdil~ 'iWlOT1TJ,!'
na 01 • .coninct.
'per/ormance,,.-The dismissal-of a suit for specifi~ performa;;ce
of a contractor part tli,ereof. shall bar the plaintiff s right to sue ' , " .
. -
· '.
·.
i .' Tn. uld lull /$ for compensalla!) for" the breach of S'Jch contract or part, as the' , : '
" ~ ' dismiUU! by in,
, , Couri, A thcfwtu case may , be, but shall not bar his right to sue for any ' other relief
lns.u/JJi. · Another to which he may be entitled, by reason ' of such bre,a ch,
' .. suit ~!J lor Illus/riJtions
. ~" t!IJ,m~g,, :, coni.- 1. Wh ere, Ir. '30 agreement it is stipu lated .that if the transaction . falls
qUtlnt upon th.
bruch 01 tho uJd through for default of the vend o r (defendants) th e vendee (plaintiff) wo~ld
contract. ·lIds B be free to enforce specific ' performance. -and If It ' falls through owing to the
any d,/v,ctl .? . 'vendee's d ~ (auit, , ' he will be. entitled to a 'refund of 'the deposit. The" Co'urt If.
" ,'; " ' 8,0, :Ap<, -83 it denies ' specific 'plZrformance can ri ghtly order a refund of th e purchase '
mo'ney, In the' same suit In order to stop .fresh litigation. The vendee can
notwithstanding the dismissal of his s~lt for specific performance, bring a •
, suit for recovery of. depos it. Raghunath v, Chandra, 17 C. W, N, 100 ,
"
i.. {" 2. Where plaintHf has paid the defendant 's money on a contract und er
/,
which the . latter . und'ertook to renew a: kanom; and.' this su ft for specific •
" !' performance was dismlsseCl, held , that a suit for recovery of renewal fees
; :J'
. lay: ·'Piirangodan v, Perumloduka, 27 Mad. 380 . . .

•
"
, ,j
:11 .-

",
 2.P ~ -=t- ~ .~ :

SPECIAC XER{P.~t!!,~,sb2F,: CO!'l,r.~~TS . , "i .

t 2;'1(" ,.
. ' '. . . '..: .'l :: '}:'!.c, -: . " ' ", ' .. .
>i!-' .
3 " Whete ,'a ' . s'~t by . a ;.,"
minor': p,1alnt"!ff -Jor, :s·pei::j£jc. - pedgrm' a nce._ .~
of ,a
, , ' . I , , .• •. . ' ,' ~; ,1": •. •,. ~. . ' " .: . '.' :
contract imh~r~ ;fnto by Nin.ls ·disinJ..Ssed lOO the grollOd 'oJ want ·of!mutuality
fo~ t6'£ ~onfu,:ct ···tb'e :'in·I~·~~;· c~ri·:n~~~~:th~i~~!:~~.~'. !P.t [,~f~~d,: O:f.J~le.. :~j~iii'~ . . If.
-, held- tWA under
II' V.!iqlty. of the J1I~, ~~y. ~~!~bYj h:~·, 1.t"fgl:~~~~~,::y;(!:~/'f?;.,B8kSh!;~;!:R;-.!9<~9., ~h. ,~32. , , . ~.~ 'uP;
" wilt pay B Rs. ' . " '''' .' . , SCOPE · · . , · 9J ~ .....----U'. ' 0
, • pOY , B the Rs. " ';'~e~tl~~ '; '; ' I:~~ 'do~~ t~~; j~ !i;;;~~ ,~~,~g 'for S~~~lfiC( pe~f::manceofa '" vI<7~.iJ
~'ny e~forced If '
. ;,'

' of,: the, :younger

contract may 'also ask for ~onipensat~o~ for .its breach : either in addition to, ~' (_.~ I
,or In sltutlon ,for su'c ' performance. If . the plaintiff elects to sue only A-.~_ .h;'~
for s ~·.::iflc ~rformance 0 . con · thereof Instead of suing In ~ ~O--:',.),P".
.
s ~o' jOln..ln the the alternative In respect of both the remedies, then the dismissal a ~ ;,t,J~D''U!
Rs .., .200 Ihould suit shall bar his right .to Slle (or compeQ$ation' for the breach 'of !.uch if \ .
rty. t(,~ rr':~rl!lnge'r contract or part as the case mll!)( he, ' ' ~ ,)\
~ fact ' \.lZlll there
° claim Though u"der Section 21 the Court may, of Its own accord, grant relief \ "",~<P ~is'.A.
by way of compensation the effect of 'Ses~I,on 24 is to bar a subsequent suit \ cr' ~ ~~
specific
1'\ ""
for damage~ for the breach o,f ~h.e _"c~intract, .. ~hat is to say, if the . plalnti~f \ ,,~ of
?lJflCe could b~ desired the Court to awa rd him compens.atio n j he should have asked for It .t".J':t)
IInpen5,at~on
' "
In (in the alternative) in the same s uit , In w!ii:C~ he sought specific p~rfor~anc.e
of the contract. Where, however, ,speFlffc performance or injunction IS
. f ,,~
}-
- .{7l~'
- Th, ' It was ' refused on the ground that damages are the pr9per remedy, the Court ~ f ~")t ,
a:se t:l~ _ proper should itself award damages, though no damages be asked for in the pl~int. ~~.~I
>n, for a penalty C./ianji v. Nusi, (1895) 10 Bom, 770. ~i

25 . /lpplication of preceding sections to certain awards and . _ •• J.b '

of.dmmovable
testamentary directions to execute se.ftlements. ,- The provisi~ ~~ •~
~. :p\,ircha'ser Is
I~ piirionitance of this .chapter as to contracts shall apply to awards to ~- .?YJ '
vv--Y- , t'
.
'be'~:eclii,ally , . which the Arbitration Act, 1940, does not apply and to
.:·:'j;r ~ f directlon~ ina will or c?dlciJ.. to execute a part.ieular settlement. •. »:.<:~
f~ Jpe.cllic .tMA tIP"! i;f)fA....xLJ.. SCOPE cr ,: ' .'
," ,erfGrjn~nce
Awards ' ma ' he made either und~r: the Civil Procedure ' Code o~ u'n der
- ' . : r1gQt: t6 :6ue the {ndian Arbitraton ct. 'After an arbitrator makes an awar, e pIS,
'. ,J.art •. as ,the' , k who agree to submit to "his' award ,: are bound by it and either party may

.
. -. oth'er relief
"
sue the other for the specific 'pedor~ance of the ~ward in Jhe ' same
mann~r as an ordinary contract would · be enforced. S.J also directions.
contained In a will or. codicil regard'ing ' the execution of a settlement may
.... .-; be specifically enforced. '· .
:uactlon falls An award Is put on the footing ': of ' a ' contract for the "purposes of
Ilridin 'would specifIC performance. By the submission to · arbitration, the partl~s contract
owl~( /, 0 the to do wha t the arbitrator shall direct them to do when he ' makes his
The ' <:-ourt' lf deciSion , and so an award J~ cons idered, In equity, to amount ' to an agreemenl
he pun :.ase by the parties on the terms pointed out by the arbitrator; of course the acts
¥e~de~ c.an
to be done must be such as the t:ourt would enforce if found In an
;ee,!-bring a ordinary agreement;' they should not 'be illegal. Mere hardship or unreasonableness
!
,'100.
In the award itself Is not a ground for refusal of specific performance
.1 triict under though It would be if th~ same were in the' submission t ~ ' arbitration; the
fo~ .·spe~lflc ' award should not be exc~sslvc, defective or uncertain. The doctrine of
ene~al fees specific perfonnan.c e of contracts is applied to awards, because. as observed

wztf"CVLUr/ ~ ~~';2:;;,: ~Ird

..
" 4 0"" , V .
".,

-
..
- ',
 '\

-> , \. ~(:

- ...
52 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT
i:
i
i
I: - , , ' .'
by Lord Eldon In Wood v. Griff/h, the awards presup pos'c." an agreement
between the parties and contains no more than the terms of t!1e agreement
~scertained by a third person.
...
I ;I'~~~ \. .:) ~~ ..~ . A party to an aW,a rd . ha~ . no right 'to enforce it by suit as such suit i~. _
:) . .. .. ~ . .......~~ ' (: expressly bar red by Se~Uon 32 of the Arbitration Act. This section cannot
tl. ··.. ~ . ./e . :J override Section 32 of the Arbitration Act. " "
.:, ','~ ~""';r"'\'< .~~ . ' An thai Section 25 of the Specific Relief Act l~ys down is that whep -
\r"':"~r\.'. ~ .• ~ the -question is one of sp~clfic performance t~lc Court has the s,a rne powers,
iI . ).,..)\,1 ~4· . . ~. . Jt ,3r:'1 d . shou~~ pro.c~ed upon th~ same principles In t~~ case of an aw ard as in
!~ , . \ ,'. ~~"'" ~'\" the case of a contract.
;~:I ,:ft..~ril;,' ~ ~~::~:t;
I ~ ~ . . • ~
," DEFENCE TO 'AN ACTION
FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE
•
'I
; j
''iY''I1''J' IUs ils~r
c!1.r."}"t~'flJld. ~ , T~e defendant may, . in a suit for specific performanc~ against him,~
..I './f '/ "" . ~'Y .. th at-
I l't Y . •cdC'lr.Jct. ~ , prove
~ I t.~~_"'j rtJJB.U. Apr. O · 1. Compensation in money would be adequate relief to, plain tiff :
i I. ·'-(V'." 'j:.I'0,
Nov. 81 S. 14(a).
:, I t ,. 7.,-.'(y V~u\,~ ~ A
y
,1'
2. The c o ntract ru ns into such minut e deta ils or I S depend ent on
! ~~. tt:~~a~ d':'J thfl / pcr .. onal qualification of the parties or Is of such a nature that th e Court
1'ir~~1hfl v.JrJo us can hot enforce perfo rmance of its material terms : S . 14(b),
.: . ~ ~enas open 10 ~ 3 . . The performance of the contract involves the performance of a
; ._.{1 d.fend4nf In 4 suit
. ,. c ~m ~ln uous d llty whic h the Court cannot supc~vise : S . 14(d).
iI for : ~~fJfi
; I
I: .
'.:~o-'dornfrl.ccc~· o~,·~4 \-~ . 4. , The contract is, in Its nature, d.e terminab le ..
• At~1 """ ·S._lt Is •. contract, by the plai ntiffs (if they are trustees) In breach of ..
"
!
!! ;i
I ''J
, .I""'x> ; ~ M~7
s.u.
-"\hr. ~ their trust or In ;"cess o f their powers : S . 1 1(2). .-
'. . ,( ~/~~ _ t.',.89 . 6. I The contract though not voidable when made gave the. ~.laintlff an
20: j ';:;;J / f.) ,J'l " IJ :' \)~i , ~ ..
'i
11
1 '~
.

~,,-
: ", '.' "
-' ...:-'......,.~ :~:" A . ~. 92 ·
..' .l · May .94
90 unfair' advantage over the, defendant : S ,
7. The performance of the con tract would invclve . hards hi p on the '_'
defendant which he" did not forese'e whereas Its no n-performa nce would'" .. -.
- -
'1, . \·,;~~o . . , 'i tln\'olve no such hard.hlp on the plaintiff, S. 20. .,

':'
1 . tynt ~ort In • . .
\! \ ':.on . I. ~4/JC 8. The conduct of the defendant Is such as to disentitle him to relief: .
'T
·.>p',~:'f/.!~
: "'~.oc .. S. 16.
9. 't he p~ajntiff cannot. gi~e !1 title ~free from reasonable doubt" : S. 17 .
I . ,' .
i, HJ . .,

I
.r,:

, : '.~ Z):'oPi'g t, , ~: . 10. The defend'a nl' Is entilled to get the contract enforced with, a
" rt.:v.~~t;,?:~t .
varialion which he may ,set up , S. 18,

I, . " ~~ '/),!~"d "

. .(":{I ., ':"0 ' , " ,
I! jJ,' ~: :t~
~
.'1 '
1''',1
. .-. Vr:~~';;}' .N
•
1
I 1 ~~; ; "':'v~{!i~ ' , .
'~
,
Iid I' -~_g,.,(1 .
' I'i(:.! - " ,V II , . . '
! ',' .....Iv \~
~, I ~ , "'-:.9;..' ,'-,
;.,U,~li(;r;1' ~"', j .\ ,,\ ~:' : ,',. I t , . \~~J.,;.j("\.; ... . .t;I .•,, :(
J r~~£1,~VV "~,, , . ,. :. " .- , .

'~~~~:~~ ",-'-- '-- -' -- .~. 'r.:·-'·" - ".:,,,,,,;;!;'

 ,r ~b- ~ /~s:I :~r
tf • 6t -t -: (Zlse' ~ . ~' ::: .: t
i;.~ : .
<,: - ?. ·. -; ~;~'~P~~~";lr ;;.t " .31 i :-~ ~ .' I~ ; ~ f.
i.~
.- - I,
:!~l! ~ ··· ..; •
~f1 ~ rp ::·· ~{
, "
.!. • .• 'r.i ·' :": t.l,:,;"";(l:
": " \'
1 r ii"'f
: . - • •
n ·..
• • •.
(' ~}"; !/;1.I :j !:,!~ .,. ! -, ":"
" 1 ., 1.'
;" ~ : :H "· v..... ·
. • . _; ~ ,'.' ....
, •••••. •.••.
..-
~ .
I
...
/ '
agref ·. ,ent :;'!' :. j,e:.'" .,\ :, ;:. ,'L ,.; AtEGT;U::;IGATION;i OF i.' .;.;; .,,; ~~ (""Il <Y ".;
'! !. agr(e:.1ent :-" ; ;J ;.I~." ~"~: \' ...:i::~ t"ji'<'i ·':~I~.\ - \rtO\:\r.'~&~ ·' \:)::"~ ·: ;·~ .: '!\"· r.·t:; . :.t' )"::-:,:'-: .~.. ,.:~~;t.'.-.:' rli~ ' *~.ft_
."., " ':i

-, t' , ?-.',.. 1, . , "-:. . : :::'IN,$])::\PMENTS ' ;\ " '-,

, sueR suit ' Is
• ticn .cannot
;:'. '26: 'whe;nhstr~~khli{iJ~~:'b~ r~'cijfje(F ' ;/'" ,'/
~ " '~ ':4' " (1) When; throughHau·d· or~. a mutual 'mlstake .of the parties,
. that whe.n · a contraCt 'or other liis!nti'neiit In writing . (not being the articles '
. m-e . p·owers . of association of. a "company to which the Companies Act,
lwai~.~·s In ' 1956, applies) does 'j~ot exp'ress th'eir .real Intention, then -
,,~
. .'. (a) either party or his representative In Interest may institute Write a short o Qt e
. \. ~/ ;n : R« lificdtjon
a · suit to have the Instrument . rectified ; or
• o f an instrum ent.
~
(b) the. plaintiff may,in any suit in which any right anslng B.U. Oct. 90
under the instrliment 'In Issue, claim In his pleading that May 91
Ocr. 92
plaintiff , the instrument be rectified; or May 94
, \ . t • (c) a defendant In any 'such ; suit as is referred to in claus e
~ nden"
- , .,n · (b). may, in addition to any other defence open to him,
the ;" • .Jrt . ask for rectification of the Instrument.
: . I • .f

(2) If, In' any su it In Which ~ contract or other Instrument is .

ric~ ~ ~f a
"
sought to be rectified und~r sub-section (1), the Court finds that
'the Instrllment, through fraud or mistake , does not 'lxp~ess the
real inte ntion of the parties, the Court may, in Its discretlO~ :
1
_.
;..c '
,reach or-
direct rectificati on of the instrument so as to express that intention,
!,' .•. L ~:- , -: -
.jntffU al';" so ~ far· as this can be done without pre{udice to rights acquired
. '~' ~
: -. oil", th ~
-' by third l"ersons In good faith and . for value,
,-~~~------=-~--~~~---
(3) A contract 'in writing may first be rectified, and then If
- -' • ' would - : the ' p,a rty claiming rectiflciittD.r has so prayed in his plead ing
.q ", iL.
~ l"" :~=1-' " and the, C_ourt tpinks <fit , : rijaY.,be speCifically enforced .
• .O·!f~Jie.F.· .e' .
i :"
, . ~. ~, ~

..• (4) .No . relleffor the rectification of ' an Il]strument shall be

S ..,~7. __ '1.
\
~ .;
granted to any party under this section unless ' It has been .
with a specifically claimed :
. :...;, Provided that where ' a party \las · not dalmed any such relief
. . ~"
"
'
'. In his pleading, the CO,urt shall, at any stage of the proceeding,
r ,- ,
. 'alk,w him t.o amend the pleading on such terms as may be just
'- far I!)cluding such . claim. ~ .
s.c .~ 26 of th'e New Sp~cifiC Relief Act which corr • ., p~nds to S5 . 3 1 to-
34 of the Ol d Act introduces substantial changes in the law, They may be
,,, .
bri 'efly summed up as follows:
(iY' C lau'se' (i) of Sec , 26 provides that Articles of -Associ ati o n o f a
,Company 10 wh ic h the Com ~anil.!s -Act •. 1956:. applv cannot be rcctifjd

..., ..

- -~ .
•

\__ .. _ L
 , ".,/
f~:!" ..:

54 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

" .
even though such~: Arllcles of Association do not conform to the ':'Jncurrent
, .
Intention of the signatories. This is based on a decision oI'Court of Appeal .-
Jn i England . Scoil v. Frank F. Scali (London) Ltd., 1940 Ch .. 794 (804)" "
,C.A. ' ' ,-

(2) Under Old Sec. 31 It could be interpreted that an instru~ent could.

be rectified only .If ·a separat~ suit. was brought for the purpose. ' Th'e re were
sev~ral declsloilS which had' no-t accepted -s uch Interpretation. To remove
, -doubts clause ' (b)'01Se,;.- 2'6-provioes thRt-ifie plalntHI may In any suit claim
relief of rectification. ·Fur-the!;" clause (c) pr"vldes. that even a de£e;'dant
might claim the relief ~f 'rectification of an instrument. It is provided that'
the Court at Its discretion might rectify an instrument or a contract if the "
~ . .-
,'. ,,' ~ourt finds that such Instrument doc~ not ~xpress the real Intention of th~ •
....::..;..,'. '- .' . parties. The Court <;an ,exercise such discretion prOVided such rectllicati90
does not prejudice the rights of third persons acquired in 'g ood faith and
for value. .

, '. (3) <;Iause (Iv) of Section 26 of the New Act provides tha,t the rcliel of
" ,
rectification shall bp granted to any party o nly when it is specifically claimed
ho.wever. the Court may subsequently allow a pa~ty to amend the pleading
to include such claim of rectification .
'SCOPE OF CHAPTER iii
Under this chapter "the fundamental assumption is that there e~lsts, in ,
truth, . between the parties a complete, and perfectly unobjectionable contract,
but the writing designed to embody It, either from fraud or mutual mistake,
Is , lncorrec t or Imperfect and relief sought Is to rectify the writing so as to
'i bring· it into con formity with the true intent. In such a case, to , enfo~ce ·the . '
i Instrument as it stands .must be to Injure. at least one party .to 'Hi to ' rescind
·Jf altogether must be to' injure oath, but to rectify It and then ' enfq'r ce It ' ls'
..
to Injure neither . but.. to ' cairy out the intention of bOth. In cases . ation;. ~
'of rectific·
. . ' '
the Court does. not put it to the other party to submit to tile variation. '
~

'.1.
. "

alleged but makes the Instrum~nt cQnformable to the intention of the parties ~
~"lih.o~t any such " o(f~r or s,ui:?mlssion ,'~ . . ~
'An aggrieved party ~hcjuld seek assistance of the Cour.t" un·~.er this'
section without unreasonable delay. Mere laches is no·t. bad to a ' suit fOI
' rectification of deed 'on the ground of mutual mistake If the rights ,or third.
..'. parties acquired in' gOQd faith , have not Interven~d. The date of notice o'f
,,
"
nlistake is the date from which time runs,

"
!,,
i
ElucidlJt. tho
Principle of rectification
'It would ' not' be out of place to give r:ere th~ 'gen,c:ra" rule and the
; " provisIons re/.,tlng prin~iple thereof as discuss ed by Story :"Sometimes the ,wriUen agreement
I' ,~ to rftdi/k:.ttJon of con~Jns more, sometimes it simply varies from their intent by expressi i"lg
i, tho . i{Js/rum'enls
I som~ing different in substance from ' the truth of that intent. In all such
I" under tho Specific •
I cases if the mistake is clearly made out by entir~ly satisfactory proof, equit y ):
] . !. J"
Relief Act.
re~forr'rls th e written ins trument 56 as to make it conformable to
I !i
;
B.U. Nov. 93
the _ precise intent of the parties. A Court of equity wguld be 01 little
I·;

I !i r .'.
;" value if it could suppress only positive frauds and leave In itial mistakes .
Innoc.ei1tiv · made to work intoler.able mischiefs .~ontr~ry to the intention of
.Ii .f; the' parties ,"'.'

" LL~. ',

. . '"
, - ,"
. ' '- , .~
.
.
"..
" . ~'~ __ " '" " . j . - . ;"I--:r- .. - .. -' ,

"r ,
I

I
 --_._--_. . . - .
.!
.: :: . , • ' -: ',I ~ , -; "
RECTIFICAnON ' OF ·· INSTRUMENTS S5
; ." .; . .~ . ;;\\a,,\ '~·~\:~':bt
,Essentials of rectification ,.., ':.~ :"" :"; "f '" ~":' , . ' .
. .
"':,;'ih~!i ' II~ai;~~ :6r;i~11 i,ii'6~t:ilh'i'ihJ~i~ef Hie:follii\;'I~!frul~" : . '
Ie c!)l1curr"ent
Jrt
•1,'
of;l~,peal
7~4_ /8_
04)
.
:~,);;.;{fil~rf.f~ :~~~'t" '}i~~~": ~~·ech~i~~~~B~l~;'~,'~~~~~~~rli ~·(;;~i~;! ~c't:u~'i c~~t'~~cU·
,:, ~..:; ..... dijret~~t '-fiC;ht·. th'~ : '~p';~~~~f~~:~~meht: :, ..':' \:''':;'; :: ' I~ •. " . .'~'
. ..... • , .. : .' '. . ' '. . < ' .., · !·.t .'· ...... ·-!.'-· . ....• • • .. "
'~' •. ' . :: -'. . ' .... . . ': .. : :
• ;um ~ Rt could ''',. (iI) There must De fra.u d,br"rtiist.ke; ' butml,take ., ~ ·ground of rectification
~ . :'-h~@f'e 'were 'mu~t be mutual. It must ·be mutual 'or common, I.e., It must be on
-To remove . the part of bo'th the , parties . t~ the Instrument. If the mistake Is
suit ,claim
cl'.'l!J., . unllat~ral, it may b~ ; ~ ground for, rescls~ion bl,lt not, for rectification
a : def<ndant of the Instrument. Secon"dly, 'm istake must be In the expression of a
Ir~vl~e(f try"at contract and n~f In· its for·matloll. More~:>ver relief afforded by Section
ntract if "the 26 Is not confined to co~t~~cts o~ly. It exten'ds to Instruments as
:ntlo~ .. of Jhe - well, e.g., a will or a ~eed. · L~stly, rectification cannot effect the
rectification rights acquired by bona h'de . purchasers for value without notice. ,
,d faith .nd Mistake must oe mutual
The word "mistake" In S, 26 ,I, not qualified by any term, it would
the ·relief of therefore extend to mistakes both of fact " and law; so far. as S . 26 is
': al!y .Clalmed co ncerned, the ground for relief in both' cases is the same, viz" that" owing
:he pl~ading to the mistake 't he minds of the parties have not met and therefo re there
, ' has been no real ins tru ment. But th~n what~ver sort of mistake it may be,
it must be · mutual. When ' the mistake Is not mutual, but on the part of one
re e~lsts. in party only, there can be no rectification. A plaintiff seeking rectificati/;m
Jle . co"ntract, must show that 1I1e re was an actual concluded contract antecedent to the
!.lal mistake, instrument sought to be rectified and that such contract is inaccurately
ng- .:o'~ a~ to represented in the instrument. If '.loth the parties took different views of
enforce the ' what was Intended there would be no contract at all between them which
. i;;es~i'n'd co uld be. c.,rried into effect by rectlfyin.9 the rnstrument: it can be allo~ed
;'nforccLft' !s when all executed ~n instrument under a common mistake and have done
~.ec~.(I,~~ttd~. what none of them Intended; rectifying a contract where the mistake is on
• Lt v~rjaHoi1 . one side only Is in effect making for one party a new contract different
.- - . "·p';rli~s
the . -
from what he intended; there can be no rectification ":,here the parties have
intentionally omitted to insert certain terms in the document; what is done
. ,{" on purpose. cann.ot be said ./0 have been -done under a mistake. This.
under this
principle is often applied in the case of vendors and purchasers when more
a: ·~t,;lt for land is included in the sale deed than the vendor intended to sell.
Its of- third
f notice of RectHicatlon of marriage settlements
P.::. regards marriage settlem~nt: which are made in pursuance of
marriage. articles and vary therefro~ , the following principles regulate their
rectification: .
e. an<t- the
a~reemeo~
(1) If' the settlement was made aller marriage,· it will always be retried
expressing so as to conform to the ante·nuptial articles; but
n all such (2) If the scttlen1e-nt was made before marriage, it will be rectified only
• oaf, equity jf -
'mabie to (i) it is: expressed to be made in ' pursuance of the ar.ticles, or
e . of little
I mistakes
(in there · is evidE'nce to prove that It was in tended to conform to the
articles .
tentiOJl of

-=!.
"'; ·!ii :-~j-. 'ii •. c-i11
· ~·"',,.;
oJ) .

t
 !I I .,.--'

iI :~:
! i 56 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT ~n).
· · r~~ · .
Illustrations
(.) A, intending to sell to B his house and one of the three godowns. e
adjacent to it, executes a conveyance prepared by B, in which , . through B 's
'i:'ir~ .
.:..~.. ~. . -.~. - -
...
fraud, all the three god'o'wns are Included . Of the two ' godowns which were :;

fraudulently included. B gives one to C and lets the other to iJ for. rent. ~l ... .
neither C 'n·or . D having any knowledge of the fraud . The conveyance may, " li.< ();
rt .~ -
as against ,B and C, be rectified so as to exclude from It the godowns given .
· Ut • :

"~"
to C; but it cannot be rectified so as to affect D 's lease, (B. U. June, 75) .' . "
.. (b) ' By • marriage settlement, A, the father of B, th.e intend ed wife. · .,
covenants with ~ the 1ntel.lded husband, to pay to ~ his p.xec utors,
4dministrators and assigns, during A's li fe, annuity of Rs .
Insolvent, and the Official Assignee c1a(m~ the annuity from
5000 . C ni es '
A. Til e Cou,rt. _
on finding It clearly proved that the. parties always intend ed that this ann 'Jity
should be pa id AS a provis ion (or . B and her children, may rectify the
j
.. .'", . -

; '-

settlement and decr ee tha t the Assignee has no right to any part of the i-
annuity, (P, U, Oct, 84)
RectifJcat!on distinguished from specific performanc e
In the words of Fry L.J,. in Hall Due v. Hall DdTe 11886, 31 Ch. 2511.
th e we1.l-known jurisdiction o( specific perfo rmance relates to . executory .
cont"r"acts, but when the deed Is e::ecuted the cont ract is conc luded and is·· 't~
governed by di Her ent ru les and p:-inciples. Rectification , therefore, is not
specific . perform ance of a cont ra d.

' .

. - ~

.;. '..j . - I ...

,-
..
• t• •
.. .
' J.
,: .....

.·1,
".!
.: . .. •
....

.•' -, .
I
\.!
, '.
 f
!
""'--M.,D:vC- d-l ~ ~
. . ". . - ..... - - .. -~. . - j'>"rO:1)~~ .. '

Res_cl~:- " '. .' '. ~, ~ . I . ~~. :: / .:"

I ...
0. Iree ;' g'o downs
. U;'r~t"g'h .B's
"whkh were
~ 0 f9r a re~t,
,~, .. ~'
. r ~

.:y
~
,. ,'.,:... .
,.
...." , .
'. :

.
. , ,.
,i' ,,\.!. ~

. ;;~,J ;' ".'."B§xG~I,~§l~tt ,Qf, ......~

'~~';';';~.::;.: .' .. .
.,'.': . . '''cbNtRACTS :i;" ' ,.' "
'", :.: . ~.
.~~
.' "."
. . a'eyanc e .may. .. ': " (:S~;6~:: ':2'7-~30i .'\ '. :,' '.'" ' :, !;~,;'.:' "' ..
I !d6'wos ' gi ven
'1. June, .75)
t end.e-d. wife ,
·.i'·'

~~
.27 . When rescission may be adjudged or refused,-
.... . .
s eXe"cutors, •
000.· C dies (1) Any person intereSted in a contract 'may sue to have it' Wh en Cdn ~ ~
The Cotr1 rescinded. and such rescission may be adjudged by ·the Court in son suo to .~~.ve
this· iirinuii~
his contract !,t:!c/n·
any of the following cases : namely,- ded ? EJuddale the
. rectify the circumst"nc,~ :~ ~
p.'h of , th e (a) where the contract Is voidable Or terminable by the plaintiff;
the Court may
(b) refuse to res-cind
: .. the con trelet.
S.U. M,y,&.4
:1. C'P., 25IJ, plaintiff.
) . ex; to ry
uded l ,;uld is
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained 'in sub-s ectio (1), State and disOJ?S .

the Court may refuse to rescind the contract-

if/he Of prov~si.on.s
(ore: Is no t under the Specific .
: '" (a) where the plaintiff has expressly or impliedly rali ied Relief Act. 1963:
reld ting to the res- .
contractj or
l< ' :. cission of contract.
:..:t,.. . (b) where owing to ' the change of circumstances which has S.U. Ap'- 82
" Apr. 88
taken place since the making of the contract (not being
due to any act of the de fe,n dant himself) . th e parties Write d short note .
cannot be substantially restored to the position in which on .. R escission of
contract .
.f :: .: . they stood when ' the contract was made ; or
.' . , . S.U. Oct. 8S
.- - ...: (c) where third parties have. during ' the s'Jbsistence of the M~r .86
contract. acquired, rights ' in good faith without notice and . Oct. 89 ,.
Apr. 90
for value; or . .Oct. .~ .
, (d) where .of'lv ~ . part of ' the"~o'~ira~t is sought to be rescinded OJ:t. .91
Nov. 93 _
and . Sll~ti. part . is not·. sever~ble from the rest of the
. " 1\
'",
tontract.
....\. .Explanafion.- In this section "contract", in relation to the
territories to which the Transfer of Property Act. 1882. does
.~

n,ot extend, means a contract .in writing,

'Any person In te rested In a c':lntract may sue to have it resci nded , and
such resci ssion, may be adjudged by the Court In the following cC\ses,
namely: ':"': .
: 1. Where the contract is voidable ~r terminable by th e plaintiff.
lIlu$tr~/jon$

-, - - .
A sells a field to B. There is a righ t of way over the field of. wh ich A
has direct personal knowledge, but which he · co ncccds from 8 . B is e lltitled '

. ~. ~ .
~

.
".

'---
~ '~:~,~.
";'' ' _ '' '

. - >' ,,'" ~:!."-:-~ ~~.~;~~!?t'J.~~?:: >··1.}::~~\:-:1!?"·.iAI*~ o;\~,:r:t;.=;:~·~;·T'. -

..
f :~, · · ,t.t~~!~'" .•.,
.-
.
.
-.. -

.
 ,

58 THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

, ,,
io have the contract rescinded (8. U. Apr. 63, Apr. 80, Nov. 82)
, '
> .'

A, intendinii to sell to B his house and one o( the three godowns -

•

I. adjacent to It, executes a conveyance prepared by H, in which, through ·n .'s

;~
ii -' f. aud, all the three godowns are included. Of the two godowlJs which ar~ "
:

, I ." 'fraudulently included, B gives one to C and lets out the other to D for ~ , ' ,
T
'I
rent. l';I~ither C nor D has any knowledge abo~t the fraud . Advl~e A about -.

.
rj . the remedy which ;'5 available to A. .
:n this ease the contract Is Induced by fraud. Therefore it Is voidable
and not void . Conscqllcntly A Is to bl~ adviscd to bring a suit for rescission
:f
.of the eon tract Joining B, C and D as defendants . (B.U. MdY 79)

~
. .12) Where th'~ ~oritract Is unlawful for causes not apparent on its fac'c
'.," .•.. ~ . . ~Hcfendant is more to blame tllan the plalntiH.
•
.. ..: " ':'\,., IUU:.'trdlions · . .
..
.. " .~ \

_ .. A, an attorney, induces his cUcnt 8, a Hindu widow, to transfer property

to him (or the ' purpos~ of dcfr.:Hlding B's creditors. Here the parties are not
i" : ,:, .
! in fault, and B is entitled to have the instrument of transfe r rescinded. (If,
however, 'ooth tIYe-p'artj~s "r~ in piJlrdi.?/!clo, this claus~ will not apply :
.,
"

. .'!I:'A, \,,\,:
" ~~I~\ i · Hdri v. Naro, (1894) 18 Born. 3421. (B. U. Dec. 7.5, MdY 79)
A agreed to let to B a sct of roo inS fo r delivering Icc: ~es on ·subjects
. . [\0\ forbidden by law. But A did not know on ' what subject 8 was to delive r
;8 lI',tJ . ~ , . . lectures. On coming to know this, A 'w anted to rescind the contract. Ad vice
.~~ '. 1..)0. '
•j !e .,qA A about his chi:nccs of ..success In case he fi!es a suit for this purpos e .
, Generl'dly, a persall in pari ddiclo cannot seck the help of a Court. But
this ' docs not mean' that " thl;! Caurtj'; ;will allow themselves to be used to
..... ..' " enforce an Jocl forbidden by law. In fBi'~: ca~e, if the contract is' not resc inded • . • •
~ r. the result will be lhat an act for(;ldl~ft 'by law has to 'be enforced . There fo re, "
,I , A will be entitled to ~.escind tho! contract. (B. U. June 75) r~ ';'-
~ ;

When Court may refusc- • - -.

.
"

,,' : " , ~, Notwithstjnding anyt hin g contained In sllb-s~ction (1), the Court ma~" '

refus.e to rescind the contract-

j' ,
":1"1
' ,' . (a) where the plail~ti!f has expressly or impliedly ratified the c~mtract; _
,

or
Li "
(b) where, ' owing to
the change of circumstances which has taken place
since the making of th~ contract" (not being due to any act of the
"
defendant himself), the parties cannot be suustantially restored. to
the position in , which they stood when the contract was rriade; or
(c) where ' third parties havc, during the subsistence of lhe contract.
acquired rl'ghts in good faith without notice and for value; or:-
(d) where only a p~rt of the contract is s~ught to be rescinded and
' ;: . such part is not severable from the rest of th e cont ract.

. /.
Explanation.-In this section "contract" in relation to. the
. , 1' territories to which the Transfer of Propert y Act, 1882 (4 of •
' "r.
, ~.: 1882), does not extend, means contr<lct in writing : S . 27.
t@) ReSCission in certai" circumstances of contracts for
, ,

.,
.. '':'
 r
.i '.Y , .f

· .
'.
/. 82)
- J .(
three gQdowns
~-. - ... , through B'S'
.....
.. .1~~,i~~~~11~1;;Jt&;:::;P.~1d~(w;;;;n:~
'. " of ,!.ihlch:has . l?l!en ~ 4¢Cf.~~1'i;Ii:;,~?t~\';;<,· ·.:, ,' " j" ·: t". <~ ;;)~ I; :":~;-
..
; .-
'
' . ," ::"

-. ..vns : which are : 'I:}i'Ti-')" VJfie~~\" ih' '~,~,;i~~Gf?~~i;~~r'fci~" ~'p'~dii{'J~ag;n;~~~~ 6f

·,· ::,·.,··-·,':h ('I.'l· ~ ; li -f · ·"';' .) rt:t:i'rJ;<·*1ih:r-~i-"·l)ct ?".·i' . : ,/', " ''' ' ':',:',. "':L .',' . ~ .,: {,. '.: ;.:. ., "'I ;. "
..... ·ler tp D for a a' , .!. cO'ntracf .for ' .the ' 'sale ;:,ori!H~'ase,f of ,Immovable ' prope'rty •' .has
.~ .... , . ; . ..... ... . . . ...... \ :'!': . ") ,·p·: ;.I'; ·,\.',,,,(I ', ,·- ~ :- . ," ' " ~ ', .
<lvlseA about
been , made arid the 'purchil's er'"or, lessee does not, within ' the
perl6:d ,allowed ' by ,Ih,i'::Ci'ec'heCirsJch further I:,.~irlod 'as ihe
;It ~' Is :.'9Idab-'e . ! ' , , , ..

Court may allow, pay 'the "purchase-money or other sum which

I ~ ...... '-.,' . ,

-for rescls'sJon
721 ' . the Court has ordere{ ' ~lril ·'to .: paY" the vendo;cir lessor m~y
t on H5 (,ace apply in , the saml! ,suit In: which the decree is 'made, to have
• the contract rescinded and on ' such application the Court may,
by order, rescind the contrac,t either so far as regards the party
;fer property in default or altogether,. as the Justice of the case may require.
rtles arc not (2) Where a contract Is rescinded under s:tb-section (1), the
sclnded , (If,
,~ Court-
M ,t " Iy ,'
(a) shall direct the pu'n;haser qr'the lessee, if he has obtained Wn'te- a short nate
o n : Court's power
on subjects possession of the property under the contract, to 'restore to award
to -d.eliver - such possession to the vendor or lessor, and compcnSdtion.
tet. Advtce
(b) may direct payment to the vendor 'or lessor of all the S.U . Mar. as
urpos{!.:, Oct, 91
:oU'"rt.' Bct rents and profits which have accrued in respect of the Apr. 92
'e,. 'll'S~d t.o- property from the date on which poss,ession was so obtained
re.sciRd~
", ' t .
by the purchaser or lessee Uf\!11 ,restoration of possession ,
~heref?'rei . to the vendor or lessor, and, If the Justice of 'the case so
. ;;"<.
req,u lres, the (eiund 6f any sum paid by the vendee or
" - "t - lessee as earnest money ' or deposit In connection with
.- - I " - "
)urt, "[l1ay. the contract. ' '
~. 7
(3) If the purchaser or lessee pays purchase money or other
•• :~ntraot i
il" sum , which he is ordered to pay under ,the decree wlthtn the
" f

m' place -· period referred to in sub-section (1), the Court may, on application
t 'of the made In the same suit, award the purchaser , or , lessee such
or~cf" , further 'relief as' he may ' be ' entitled to, .including In appropriate'
de; L. cases all ' or any of the, following reliefs, namely:
)ritract,
(a) the execution of "a proper conveyance or lease , by the
f :" \_
ve~dor or lessor;
,d and
' (b) the ' delivery or possession, or partition and separate
) fhe possession, of the property on the ' execution of suc h
(4 :of conveyance or lease,
• (4) No sepa rate suit In respect of any relid which may be
claimed under this section shall lie at the instance of a vendor ,
(or ,~
purchaser, lessor or lessee, as the case may be ,
, .
. ~
"

.- '.'
.
, '

.
; ,'

,
 ,

60 , ' THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

:. - (5) The costs of any proceedings under this section shall be

in the discretion ' 6'f the Court : S , 28 ,
, 29. Alternative prayer for , rescission in suit Jor specific '
.:-, performance, -A .plalntlf(instituting a suit for the specific performance
of 'a , ~ontract in ' writing may pray in (he alternative that, if the
contract cannot be specifically enforced, it may be rescinded
' ana delivered up to be cancelled; and the Court, if it refuses to
"\'.. \1':. enfr.rce the contract specifically may direct it to be ,rescinded
~ \'\6") '
and delivered up accordingly,
'3\\\ '0\
m," \r, '
30, Court may require parties rescinding to do equity, - '
"
iH~ .11;1 On adjudging· the rescission of ' a contrilct, the Court may
require the party to whom such relief is granted to restore,
"so far' as may be, an'y benefit which ' he may have received ,
from the other party and to make any compensation 10 him
which justice may require,
; ' . . C~urt may require parties rescinding to do equity (5. 30)-On adjudging
the rescission of a contract, th~ Court may require the party to whom .such
. relief Is granted to restore, so far as may be, any benefit which he may
have -received from the other party and to make any compensation to him
. w.hlch J~stlce may require: S. 30.
Cowley v. PaCK/e.-An action to set aside a transa ction for fraud or in
the alternative for specific performance of a compromise is not maintainable; ~.
this' reverse mode of seeking relief is not permissible j but a person may sue
for specific performance and urge that if th e Court Is aga inst him on that , ,
ground, the contract may be wholly rescinded ..
.-J
"
:-~ Rescission for fraud
, \
.' A contract Induced by fraud is not void but only voidabl.e. Therefore,
:'1 'where a contract Is Induced by a lraudulent misrepresentation, the party
.:l , " ')":)1
defrauded may either-.
£i ···m\l,o\
J
rl OJ rescind th~ contrllct, or
'o·.n<:lbu.
"! . ~uI.\\ <;:. \ (2J affirm !he contract, and sue for damages it sustains from th e
,I
.- ·..... tNltIU misrepres entatlo.n ..
.~j ;?8 . l ~ • In or~er that a fraudulent misrepresentation should provide a ground
,I :f(? ~I . •
for the re's clssion 'of the contract, the misreprese~tation relied on-
i (1) must be a misstatement of hct, not a mere expression of opinion;
": (2) the fact 'must be material; ,'and •
;;:
, (3) the misrepresentation must be by the party or his agent.
The right of rescission is lost when the !Jerson entitled to rescind elects
. to wa ive rescission and .aHirm the contract. •
I'
,
';
"" ~.
','
"

';
~::;,o.~.,,-c.,~;;~, ;" '"
>
. ,~
-,- .... .. - :;;,;-'m-':;~
... ------;;:;;
· - --·r ':-;-~
 f
I ,. ;--

j'l.
., ,

· ;ectlon ~hall be
• • l '
'. ~. ,~"),v.
- ...·it fpr;' specific
, :.. lfic perfo'rmance
~ve · that, if the
be.' rescinded
' f It refuses to
De. '~esC;lnded Under what
cumstlJnces Cdn
. .
~
p~rson sue lor ~
d;eqUjfy. - .. c.ancelldlion 0/ an'
• Court may
ins/rumenl .'
S.U. Mar.
I to,
·restore
. ,
lVe , received
tion to' him · (2) If ttie Instr:ument · has be~n registered under the Indian
Registration Act, i 908: the . Court shall also send a copy of its
...{ " ecree to .the officer lri whose office the instrument has been
,On adjudging ·· so registered; and such officer ·shall note on the copy of the·
o whom such
instrument contained
. in. his books the fact of its cancellation ,
'hicJi he ' may
;ation to.. him WHEN. CANCELLATION OF AN ·INST./1UMENT
MAY BE ORDERED (QUIA TIMET ACTION)
. . , (1) Any person against ' whom a written Instrument Is (i) void or
('we{ or in
· .voldable, (IiL who has reasonabl e apprehension that such instrument. If left
"_ n~l.nt~ini~lei outstanding. m..ly cause h im serious injury. may sue to have it adjudged
· _ ; on~ 1'nStY '§ue .
void or voidable; and the Cou,rt may , in its discietion , 50 adjudge it and
!"lIm Gn: that
_ ;_ . .. -Y..•. .:- order It to b. delivered up arid cancelled : S. 31(1).
. . . ~ .
.- . . ~.~ . 1.,- (2) If the Instl"l!ment Is ' registered the Court shall also send a copy of Its
.- -. decree to the officer In whose office the Instrurr.ent has been registered . Such
. .~~
oHlcu shall ,note . the facts i of Its ' cancellation on the copy o( Instrument :
S. 31(2) . .. , . .. .

.. ;_ Illustratiolls -

from
"- · ~W A, the ow~.r ,01 ! ··ship, 'by · ira~d·ulent'y representing her to be
the seaworthy Induces B:: 'an ' underwrlter to Insure her. B may obtain the
, cancellation of the, policy : ·(B. u. ' April 63 and June 74)
·a gh•. .np"·. (b) A conveys 'and to' B, who bequeaths It to C and dies . Thereupon
D gets possession 'ot the lal)d lind produces a forged Instrument stating
.
opinion;
.' that the conveyance was made to -a !n trust ' (or him. C "may obtain the
cancellation of the forged Instrument. .
'rd o B that th~ tcnants In h is land were all at will,
A r"e p'r esentJng ' tO
Id elects sells It to O. an'd conv~ys it to him by an instrument. dated 1st January ,
· 4977: Soon 'after' that 'day, A fraud ulen tly grants to C a le.ase' of parts of
• · the lands . ' dated the 1st " O!=tober, 1976. and procures th e lease to be
registe'r ed under the Indian Registration Act . B may obtain the cancellation 1:'1:':'
of this 'ease .

. ' '-
• J

..; ..
, "~ '

.. :.
,

'

", c. '

,..
,.
.
.,,
,
 // - 62 THE - SPECIFIC REUEF ACT .~ ," . _ "/ 7 .

/ (d) A agrees to sell and deliver a ship to B, to be paid")-pr iJ!~ by:

( .
,- ~. . ", ,acceptance of four bills of e'xchange" for sums amounting to Rs . .3'O.;.OOQ ,. to· .. :
be drawn by A 00 B. The bills are drawn and accepted but the ship ' Is, riQ! ' <,:"
- , - . ': -
: ~-; . ' _f..~ 'd!'J,~ered according , to the agreement. A sues B on one of the' bills: B"-.(f)aY~. · '0
1...;/ ( . .,.-- -
~ :'~; ob~_\hce 'c oncellation?f ainhe bills : S, 31.
-
':' .' .'<:, , - "-', ./

'h "
- -: _- ,,1/:'" "i( -, ""9.u1"1, !Imet- action _ , - • -' : -, '{
- / , !~ :u]e'~.!!;;; 'g(y.n under this section Is founded upon the administration, "
<.y-
ell. p.ro~ectlve i.Ylli£e for feat (quia timet) . and If there. Is no reasonable ..
'" ....,.... . .:,. ' " apprehension or serlou~ Injury t.o plalntl![ a suit under . this section will not lie.
. . ~~? " The jurisdiction 01 a Court of eguity to order cancellation and delivery
f)t ~ of agreements, deeds. ~tc'~': Is ' ba;ed" upon the adm inistration of .a protective . ~ •
.' ~.- ... . . , . cir " p'reventlve ' JUStice. The- Court . ~1II Inte~fere·· to prevent multiplicity ~ Of ....

J
.r :_ ..~It;u~r ::;:arM~~:th~Lls
.' 'called
;~~~;I~L;e~~:~:d itu:~~U~'~:~ ~~~:i·;~.c:s °i~ itJh~e~~I;i~I~:~
quia IImBI; fea~ Jh~t.
Jor. .. s.lJch _agreement. securities. deeds or,
'.\
''f'
"

other Instruments may be vexatiously or Injuriously used against h im when ... {

, ;. ' 1 '.' '. th.e e~Jd~nce to Impeach them may b e los t; or that they may noV:' thr ~~· .· .~
[w .. "f' cloud oLs'usplclon over -his title - or Interest.·· The -re lief a s to cancellation .
; ...•...
:1 .. ; of instrument under this section Is founded upon the.. admin is trat ion of the!
: .~
protective Justice. The relief In qu estion Is granted befor e any violati o n of
· the plaintiff's rights tak es place; though not act ual Injury ha s be e n sus ta ined,
~ .. . · the Court In terferes because It is apprehencied fr-om the peculia r relation
-, · .between th e parties . No te that a part y is not entitled to thi s reli ef as a
matter of rlg,",t~lts_.ex~rcisJLJ L a .matt er o f so und judi.::ial d isc reti o n .
Cancella tion Is 'unnecessary where th e de ed is a sham o r void ~b .- -~ .
, .
initio. A ' docu~ent is 'a nullity where the ex ecutant sign ed o nly o n th~ first
' page and did not sign on the rest of the pages. on d iscoverin g that It was
:"0'( lil 'accor!dance with the terms previously agreed ' upo n,' and such a
'. .document need n9t be set aside or 'cancelled oS I~ is of n o '. le·gal effect. A ,-
'I
.
;0
' person can sue for :a.:bstantla! reUef without seeking cancellation of a void ' _ f

\~ -
· or·· sham ' document. The following ' two cases Illustrate this point. In a suit
.lor partition ' a . question arose whether the plaintiff- had relinquished his
... share by. two deeds of relinqulshme~t or noe. The trial court held that
' -,' :' !' -_~ese deeds were executed by ' the plaintiff and dismissed the suit. The -
':.
." '0 - · H ,19h. Court set aside the Judgement of th'e trial court and passed a decwe
~. ~ . f9r p~rtiilon holding those deeds as sham documents . This finding of '"the
.' 0 !.:

.-.. , .~;~: .-....:~.~.. :~ '. .. High Court was af(l~med by the Supreme Court. (Pandll Sri Cha;'d v. ':~
,
, -, Pandil Om Prakash; AIR i977- SC 1823) ,
· ;'-.' ~ ~o'ne recent cue It was held that . .It Is a well settled princ iple of ' la w
that if. a . particular document or decree Is vo id the 'person affected by it
can Ignore the same aDd sue for substantive relief without seeking any
:'f!E;cJaratloll tha f . lt .Is void or ,.any cons eq u ential relie ( Cor- its ca nc ella tion .
(Sanjay Kaushik v, D, C K.ushik, AIR 1992 Del. !l8i, ,
' When a particular lns crum.mt o r doc umen t i5_. (ound to" b e void It will •
. I;>~ of no legal cQ~sequence . It does .nqt bin'd anyo~c even withou.t It.s
cancellation. ~owever. If It Is allowed to remain in existence (or a conSiderably
long : pe'r i6d of 'time es p eGlally ~hen it do es not contain any endorsement •
across Its
fa~ e of its ca.nce-Uat lo n subs equent tu . its eX'e cution by a co mpetent
' .
.. . '

: ,
- .. -~ -=: -
•
 /
' .:i'
c:t>:NCEY::." Tlg~':;?~' i~l~l ~:U~~~~~~. ", ; ~3
. .,. ' . ~-..' .• ..' . :1" .'
~Pl!rt ,of y-l, 9_~, .J~ .":,!~:I:J rr.lslea~ '- rn~,I}y,i.ang([rn!~y ~give j-,!~, , tS J ~~r)e~~f/~'~'~a.c~,, ~ ~~
~~~.~J!~,g~t)·~h.~'-iH~ f~.ai/5.~~.s~:J~~~~.~~19!f/j.p.~r~.ory;~~~s. ! I.~~~~.~t~:.~J(~ct.e~ .
. ~y; It J....n,~.i p!a'~~o'\NJ 1!9h"t"a~,~~ !!tl!.~~~h~n.Y... p!()I'~~V i In,l~_?!!b~\~,~~ :~~t ~O\~ , ..
an? , m~~ •.c~~.t.~ >comI'I!,~~t,lon~;,t,~ ~!~~t!s.e" to '.U1!:'l~~.:'.. ~rr~!~I'1~~IB~!f; Bu_t .
'- . for th~se" wh9: .~r~ ..aw~.~~ _.g .~ ~<~?~ ,n~~~!tl.~,I;1r: h<?ldl~9:'~\:, ?~~U~~.!a,~ : ;1r1~~, ~!!n~,
/
or dQcument, t9.i,be, -.vold;i r, ~:h_eJ~l :~a'l ' ~e mlsle<t "!>y,•.ft~::;'{e1Y,'C ,,,,,'$.t~,,ce,,
• Rell.sonable lI.pprehenslcn of serious ' Injury from, a void document therefore
cn/nlsiratldn ',- -.;~ .
provides a ClI.use , of action to~: a ,:per:~on, ~o approach the ', ~o~petE~n,~ .,courr
reasonab~'", '~..
of law for Us cancellation, Rain P~darath v, Second Addl. District Judge,
.vII) not II~. :-
Su!tonpur, (1989) ALL C.J. I; 1989 RD '21. '
d ,li.'I~ery " ,,:. \."'. ' ... \ :-". " ,: ,, '. "

The relief by way of cancellation" of an Instrument can be cl"almed by

protective '
joliEliy "or ; - lmy person - ~galnst whom the Instrument Is void or voidable. Such person
need nbt ' necessarily be a party to : the Instrument. -Thus It can be claimed
pr/ncl;'e" ":;.
by a , creditor In a representative' ..capaclty or behalf of all other cred ito rs
'chnlca"~ "
j ' , to set aside a deed executed by his debtor wh ich amounts to l!. fraudule nt
eed! 0'1:": preference under Sec. 53 of T. P.Act 1882 : Ishwar v. Dewar (1903) 2 7 ,
~ whe n'\ ( Bom , 146.
throw ,/
elldl on -,.. ;.. ... , Cond itio ns for th e re lief
of ih- ' -.. , In order that S. 31 may ap'ply ' the pla intiff must make out-
tlon l (I) that th e instrum ent is void or voidabl e as against the plalntlfl-
talned
(Ii) that he ha s reasonable apprehens io n of injury from the Instrumen t
?l a tIQn' .
If It Is , Je ft outs tanding -
as a .
UiI) that the threatened InJu ~y Is ~erious-
(Iv) that the Court ought - under the circumstances of the case In th e
,ib ' - ,. ,zxercls~ of Its discretion ' adjudge the Instrument void or voidable
" 'fI;~I~
I ~ ill I '" M. and order It to bj! dellve;ed . a~d cancelled.
Was - ~ ..;
h ..... 'It ' Th e 'relief by way o f c anceJl~t1 o'n Is give n under S, 31. which se ts o ut
.:!}; -'~ : :' tha t "any perso n (i) agl!.ins t whom a written instrument Is void or voidable, .(
.. '-. 'olif -, .: "

.. :at
'ul/-
hi. ,.
..
(Ii) who has reasonable apprehension th.a t such ' Instrument, If left outstll.ndlng. {
may cause him serious injyry,. ma¥ sue to have It adjudged void or
volda~le; an? the Court may, (III) '".. I~s discretion, so adjudge It an~ order
It to be delivered up and . canceHed ', .
, Th~ relief by way ' o(re;cis~lon ' an'd ·' that by way of cancellation, •
~/ '
-:.. \
, :¥
, ""

,, ~ . ~l(
. {r ,
/. ~;v...

~ ....... ~ ~ "",.. . <

'\£V
~-i.~
., :~/.
• Je
:e both available to persons other th,a.n 'parties to the contract. They dllfer In "..J,(, , _'
e '( /the following aspects : p -_ ~~'l.tJl __
:<';'1 J.. Unlike S, 27. the reller given ' ~y, S. 3'1.1s not limited to contracts . .)W (/'...) . ?-7
2' I . . .
, Un Ike S . 27, S . 31 , requ,lres that there should be reasonable
f,A,
_~- '
'-~'f-
'Y
l!.pprehenslon of serious Injury H the do.cument be' left outstanding.
3 . Section 27 Is applicable only when the coritrl!.ct Is voidable or
, ,- I , ./

A·
where its unlawfulne ss o r nul li ty Is not appa rent on Its {~ce but S. 3'1 Is ," I.

applicable to void Instruments as well. and it is, Immate'ria'i whether the

nu~lI.ty Is a pparent or no t.
eMagM/.1 v. Dhofldu. (1903.) 27 Bom': 607 .-0n 12th March . 1889.
C ~ed D to recover on a bond passed by D b C. To th is suit the
defence was th at th ll bo nd was v'o ld being pa ssed fo r the ball!.nce due o n
wagering transactions , While this suit was pending D brought a suit on

1!
., -

::::;,':
", .
~----------------------------------------------------~,

I' , '-
. 64 THE SPECIFIC REUEF I\CT
~I
"
l~
".
1
."

- " ,I 13th Ju ne 1899. to have the bond, mentioned above , can celled and i~ ., ,
It::~
,., ,,';0 - ,'.::'. • ! ~ .
delivered up to him under~ Section 39 of the Specific Relief Ace. ' Held ;
. ', that the form of speciflc - r ~II~( under Secti~n 39 of the Specific Relfef 'Act I~
.,
;',- I.
. .', - ~a's ' f~unded upon the administration of a protectivE'; justice for fear; that I. .', ;', ~
,--
:In his case there could be ~o iear that D would ' suffer serious InJu ry_ if he .. ,- - .'
. ~ · did not bring the second su it. for th e plea w~ich was the foundation at If '\..
!.
the ' second ~ction was ' raised by him in the ' defence to the first suit:
" a'nd that . . th~refore .: no necessity for the brlng,l ng o f ~he s'econd action had
-.
'i.(.,'

arisen .
:-
32. What instruments. may .be partially cancelled 1. -
Where an instrument is eVidence ' of different rights o r o f different
I ~I
. --. "obligations, t!-le Court may, in a proper case. cancel it in. part r
\

and allow it to stand .for residue: S. 32 . I, p

i' IIJustrations
,- ,, - - tI
f
, .. A draws a bill on B who endorses It to C. by whom it appears ro be ,
endorsed to D who endorsed It to E C 's endo rsement is lorged . C Is '
,,
i II
'. e1'!Wled to have such ' endorsement cancell ed leavi'ng the bill to sta nd In
other respects . (5 . 40). (B. U. Nov. 80) .
, t
" .;.
'Inder Pe"had. v. Campbell (1881) 7 Cal. 474 .--'- A agre ed to grow
Indigo (or B on 20'h big has of land for 9 years. O [ these. 16 1/ l big has are
. ~ituated in village R and are held by A under a sub·lease fr o m X. Y being
I
1
, 'f

i'
I '
I
the superior landlord . The remaining 4 b ig has are situated in village K and
belong to A . X fails to pay rent to Y, and Y resumes possession o f land .
I
,I The contract becoming Imposs ib le of performance A may ob ta in cancellation
of the agreement a~ regards the 16'h blgh as situated in Village R ,
Ram Chande~ v, Gim.',. Sardn. (1917) 39 All. 103. -A executes a deed
I ..
,j . ~ of m o rtg age ' In favo ur o f B, A gets back the deed [rol1"l 8 by frau d and ' ...

l ;'. '~} '. . . 't. '~";G. ~~~:;~~: °l~ I;'o~g~:ce~t :;r e~;ltI;d2~~ ~~r~eor:~; ~~dboers:i!~~~ ~~n~~II:~~' i: ': :-: J. :
~1··,::2~:" . ' }J. ~ ~ :r~. '" :..Iea..vlng the deed to stand In other respects. .f
lr .:-:! :
a _

ri '\l,., { ~ '~ ~~ ' '. 33. power to require benefit to be restored or compens.ation. \ .
'I' :,,'. ~. '~
' ~ i~ i. o.. be made when ' instrument is ca,!cel/ed qr is successfully . ~ r·
ii:' . ;',';: > -,..~: ~ .~ On adjudging the c"ncell~ti~n _.~~~-. 1_
. · :resisted asbeing void or voidable. -{I)
'jl .. ' ' '\:._.~. J. \)i ." '01 an _Instrument, the Court may . require the .party to whom\~.y. \:
i ~ ' I\:" ... """"\:: .'
suc.h relief is granted to resto re, so far as may . be, any. benefit ( ' .
4L: '. . ( .:.'. r;,:f ... . whIch he may have receIved from the other party and to make -
if' '. -;:y .:. an'y ·.compensatio n to him which justice may require .
I . .' t) . (2) Where a defendant successfully resists any s uit on the ,. ;

~I . .' . ground-
j, •
:;, . (a) that the instrumen t sought to be enforced against him in
the suit is voidable, the Court may, if the defe ndant has
rece ived any benefit under the instrument fr om the other •
party, require him te.. restore. so ' far as ·may be', such

... __....... .
.I

"-
 f

' .:0'

i
CANCEllATION . OF INSTRUMENTS 65

c~ n~efled and benefit to that party 'or ,to make co'mpensation for 'it; '
" :elis/ ;AqC Held ' . ., '. ',' , " ' '. . . .. . , I. " . "'. .

eCifi~, Relief Aci '(b,- that 'the, agfi!Eirri'ent"'sought to be enforced agal\lst him in
e 'fer fear: that the s~itis void Gyreasori oLhis not,havingbeen competent
<o~ . ous "'n Jury if he to conti-ac'! 'u~der"Secticin , 11 ,of 'the Indian Contract Act,
: (?lJ.jldation of 1872, the Court may; if th'~ d~fendant has received ~ny
• the first suit.
benefit under . the agreement from tne other party, require
! nd a~tlon
"
had him to restore, so far as may be, such benefit to that
party, to ,the extent to which he or his estate has benefite,d
celled?
thereby.
O{-dilfe'i e'nt
I it , (~, part IIJusfr.'Itions
1. Where there was no fraud or misr ep rese ntation by a minor and the
p laintiff kn ew that the ml no~ had a ce rtific ated guardian, It was held that
the drscretion disall OWing compe~5~tlon was properly exercised . (Bacha} v.
H.yal, A .I.R. 1"937 Oudh 521) ,
2 . A mortgagor employ!ng an att o rney IJIho also acts for the mo rtgagee
In mortgage transac tion, must be ' taken to . have notice of all the facts
bro ught to the knowledge of the attorney and therefore, wh e re the Court
j to ' grow rescinded the cont ra~t of mortg ag e on th e ground of the mo rtgagor's ~
blghas are Infancy and found tha t the attorney had notice of th e Infancy, or was put
upon inquiry as to it, it was held , that th e mo rt gago r was not entitled to
:. Y beIng
ge K and com pensation und e r the provisions of Sections 30 a nd 33 of the S . R.
I 01' land,
Act. (Brohmo Dull v, Dhormo Dos, 26 Cal. 381)
nceUatJon NOTE
'I ' ,.. " -
" !' I ,. . Th is se ctio n can be co mpared to Section 28I2) of th is Act. While Wn'te d short n ote
" a,:(jii",d' SI!Ql"jon 28(2) pro vid es (or compl2nsatio n at the tirTH:!: of pass'ing a decre e on Court 's
I ~d i 9d .' for resclsslon o f a contract, this s ection p'rovldes for compensation at the power 10 d Wdrd

B. .B's~ ti m e o f passin g of a decree for cancellation of

,an Instru ment. The principles compl!flsdtion,
.- ..- ncelled ' underlying this section tim be analysed as follows : S,U, />1", 85 '
_ ' -;' I OCI, 87
, "
(i) The Court has neJ doubt a discretio n to order restoration of co nsideratio n Apr. 89 '1
money: but there must be ve~~tsti'~ll~' circumstances ' in the case to 'enable
the Court to 'find that there Is an equity In favour o f the defendant.
II/us/ration
Where the de fe nda nt has been -In possession of land ,for the 'last
twelve years and has peen enjoying Its produce, and has be e n sufficiently '
compe nsat ed, noth ing further can reasonably be demanded of the plaintiff
as compensatio n to the defendant. (Chogdlfd v. ASd M,al, 17 l. C . 371)
. (II) No compensa ~lon 1.5 payable where t~e contract is v:.lthout consideratio n,
t.ge
, IIluslriffion

Whe re a bond executed by a minor ·was subsequenUy incorporate d as

a co ns ide ration for another:· lJond executed lJy him on attaining major ity ,
1/1 '

j
~nd the ,pth;:r party brought a suit Oil. the basis o t the latter bond , held,
as. 'that no co mpen~atio n \lias pay'a ble ~as there VJ.3S r.o consideration for the
er . latter bC?~d.-the bond executed · dt,lrlng minority h ... ving lJeen vo id . (Ram
Sarup v, 'Bnj M.ohon, A ,I. R, 1938 Oudh 14) .
.., - :r / SR - ~
'.
, ~
,
i
...
:~, I
~:·:.' · -""' · ~I l · · ·
.: .- )-

•
'-..
 "
..._-----'.
'f
','(
,I "t :
i : . 66 THE SPECIFIC REUEF ACT
· ,!
-~lJ~
rI'i:.
·
'.,
!:
:'
(III) The discretion conferred upon the Court by Section 33 should
so Interpreted and , exercised as only to Impose upon a plaintiff seek ~ng
-'

relief by way. of cancellation of ~m Instrument such conditions as the I~:.I;'/.i

I , .-
;
would Impose upon him If the position of (he par tie s were reversed and
/;/ he were the defer"!dant in a suit br~ught to enforce the In strumen~ according
to its terms . .
"'I
' 11,"
IlIusfriJlJon 1
Ii Where the plaintiff brought a suit for setting aside mortgage-de~d
I) . executed by him while he was a minor and his mother, who was his ' ~
certificated gU ~'(dlan, and a decree was passed conditional on his paying ' I
II
./
i, the full conslderallon of the deed In sull, It was held that as a minor's "1
,contract was VOid" th~ plalntl{{'s suit snou ld hav~ been dec re ed as br(,'Jght ~" .
. (G.ya P"s-d v. Sarloroz, 29 I.C . 972) . :
"f
•

· I':'. I ',
~ "
. MINOR'S AGIlEEt--IENT
Clause (b) of sub·sectlon ,(2) of this section provides that If dn agreement
sought to be enforced against a minor, or a lunatic is to ue cancelled on
the ground that the agreement Is void on a ccount of his Incompetence to
enter ' lnto a contract, such minor or lunatic may be requlr:ed to restore to· ~. ;­
1--
the other party any b~nefit received by him , This principle Is applicable ..... _, (
. even when the" minor has made a fraudul en t or an erroneous statement .'
regarding his ag e,. I
.j
I

:
,i· .

"
!

. ;

i
!,
! '- .
:-.. -
 (

"

: CHAPTER VI ,.

;Iff
shbl:!rd : be
s"ekrng
. .;
~ :

.,
. .'. ·. DEC~A~AT.qRY: ~ECREES · ·.~0 ~.~
:~ as fhe" law '. . .. . (Seco"'34 :< S5) .....' ". ". . . 0;; CV-''-
~-. , /ersed and . - .- ' . _. . .
• ~ . a~C9r9ing 34. Discretion of Court as' to 'de~/aration of status of right:-
• Any p~rson entitled t~ any" Iegal ~haracter, or to' any right as

:gi).ge·~'eed
a
to anY ' property, may Institute 'suit against any person denying
or Interested to deny , his title ' to such character or right, and
1 · w~s his ·
lis p~Ylng ~ the Court may, In its discretion, make therein a declaration
,3 fnlnor'~ that he is so entitled and the pla ,ntiff need not in such suit ask
· br{\lJght. for any ' further relief , '
/
Provi<;led that no Court shall make any such declaration
Write a short note
where plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere
, gre'~ment on : Declaratory
declaration of title, omiis to do so. Decree.
celled on
. Explanalion.-A trustee of property is 'a "person interested B.U. APL ' 83
~te nc (
, ' .,
Oct. 84
estor\:. .0 to deny " a title adverse. to the title of some one who is not In Oct. 85
pplicable existence, and for whom, if In existence, he would be a trustee . Mar. 86
tatement Oct. 89
SCOPE AND ' OBJECT
Apr. 90
The main object of this section Is to dispel a cloud cut upon the title Oct. 90
. , or legal character of a person . Th ough there may not be immediate Oct. 91
danger . threatening such title or legal character , yet a person should be
able to seek the -aid or the Court to get the declaration so that he can
r, peacefully enJ.o y title or the legal character with out any fear and future
~. '. disturbance . The proviso alms at ' preventing multip li city of litigation . Where

.- - .. the plaintiff Is in a posit:on to claim . furtiler relief at the time of the suit
but omits to do so, he will not be allowed A ba,re declaration under th is
section as It will lead to multiplicity of· suits , for h~ may seek a bare '
4eclara,tion In one zmd further relief without which . such · declaration Is
r~ tlle In another suit.
h Americon Express 80nk Ltd. Y. C~lcutt. Steel Co. 1(1993) I S.C.J .
'. . 2691. the Supreme Court h .. held that the Jurisdiction to grant declaratory
relief and Injunctio n under the Specific Relief Act, Is discretionary and
must be exercised· ficcordlng to sound principles of law and ex debito
Jus/ii/a. The plaintiff cannot claim the relief as of right. The apex court
further observed that grant of declarat(~n or Iniunctlon relating to commercial
transactions . tend s to aid dishonesty and perfidy, while a refuslIl generally
encourages candour in business beh.lI.vlour, · facilitates free flow of capital,
prompt compliance of covenants , sustained growth of commerce and above
a!1 Inculcates respect for the effiCACY of Judicial adJudication. Before refUSing
or gran110g a declaratlon or Injunction or bQth the court must weigh the
~ros fand cons In each case, consider the facts a nd clrcumstances In Its
proper ~er5pec~ve, a.nd exercise discretion with circumspectio n to further
.the ends of justice. . .

-1 _ i.
r
. /
I· .
, -. ' .
• •

....
••
.. : ,

,
 ~.
.,P' -
I r.c
?5!
. = .. 24 _ _

j t"" " , 1
1

68 11;E SPECIFIC REUEF ACT

,,
.' "

THE REQUISITES OF A DECLARATOR Y ,?ECREE . .~'; , a ~,

The (ollowing are the chief requisites so that a person- may be 'entitled !hi
to a declaration under this sectloo- . '.·' .a... ' , ~

" ' 01
.. , (IJ The' plainllff m~~1
eSlabllsh al Ihe lime of Ihe suit Ihai he is ;~Iilled t . ~d~
· ...(0 6ny legal chuacter or ' lo 6ny right as 10 6ny property.
, ,~ . One pf these "-0
~;
L. . ' .
U~
. would be a sufficient condition (or filing ,a suit u,:.der this section. · ,2-5
I' It mus< also be noted thzst only whe,n the character or right 15 of a
ligal noture, suit con be flied under this section . . In &nsf v. Xanhlya,
· '

nc
(1921) 43 All. 159, It'·wa~ held that a suit for declaration that a pl~lntiff an
hlll$ a right to receive al~s could no't be granted for the simple reason that W~
the right to beg was no legal right or ri ght of legal character, -fo
Wn1e " short note
Legal Character, Generally, legal character would mean the same •
on . : Suit . for ' 'T"""
. 9v
oec/"r" lion of thing as status , It includes th e attributes of law that would attach to a th
Sidhu or righl. person In his personai' and Individual capacity, For example , legitimacy, Wi
S.U. Oct. 83 ~opt~n, marriage, dirii0rcj,... etc, It has been also hel:I thai It would
Oct. tl.6 Include the rlghL of ranchlse, the right o f being elected a MunIcipal
Nov. 93 . CouncIllor or the right ~maln In service a9ai~sL a~ Illegal order of
d·lsmissal. (Stale of Bihar v. Abduf Mapd, 1954 S.C.R . 786).
The below m entioned cases can be profitably stat ed to ill ustrate the
significance of thi s requisite , hI
1. I'; Ganesh v. Rangnalh, (1918) 20 Born . L.R. 4i3 , 'he wid o w 01 a th
"Th. ob/llct of Hindu who lived in ,union with 'his family having adopted a son to her
gr#Jnllng eI.e/.·
(dlory decref!$ by .
"
deceased husband. her unmllrrled daughter sued to have it decla red that '
the ~doption was Invalid , Held, the plaintiff was not entitled to maintain
r.
er

to
~e court Is r~/1y
/0 pBrpefu.af. and
the suit under Section 42 (old) , ot the Specific Relief Act insomuch as she
stungth.n In. was neither entitled to ... ny legal character nor ' had she any right to any .r o. -
tllstlmony -(.g,U· property; her only right being to be r.1aintained out of the family property , " te
ding th. tIt/~ 01 and to have marriage expenses tq)m It,
the pWnlJ1! so tII.!1
adv~rsll -?"adcs
2, In 'V.iI/ie/ali 'v. DllJnutullJ, 8 All. 31. a Mahomedan bro ught a su it .' - - "

upon /t mAy not

wulcen It "-Dis·
against a person in possession of certain property for a declaration, that
the property was wakf; , he did not allnge himself tq be
interested In the .'
cuss Ihe s" dlefnenf property further than as blo?lng a Mohamedan, He staled as his cau~e of
with reference 10
th. -prollislons rei,, ·
a~t1on that the d,e fendant had In a lorrr.er suit betwc:~n the same pa.rtles..
liJed a written statement denying that the property was wakf; the sun was n,i-
ling to cledd'iJ/ory h'eld to be unmaintainable because the plaintiff did not assert .Jny right I~ d'
d.cr.es <lndOe property nor had he any legal character denied by an y on e ; his character.
under Ihl! Specific a~ a Mah o medan was nqt denled ~ by the defendant. ' The words ~ ' legal a
Reliel Act. .
S.U. Ma<. 93
character' included right of tranchlse dnd a ' rig ht to stand as cand idate In •
Sl
election.
tl
3, A suit for a declaration that one person is relded to another where
Ii
there is 11:0 question of any legal character or some right Is' n'o t , competent.
Thus, a suit for a , mere declaration that the plaintiff is the legitimate son
of the de fendant Is not malntaln4ble where the plaintiff Oz. s no present •
Interest In the p roperty' of the father and the father tan do whatever he • •
likes with the property during his lifetime , The mere fact th.,t the defendant •
,v
stated that the pla ,ntlff was his illegitimate ' ·son gives him no cause of
action. (Mahomed Shah v. Pir Shah. A.I.H. 11936) ' Lah . 858). "- •

i'
• i
I:

,
 ( .....: - -;
I
," ' ~.

DECLARATORY DECREES
, • 69,

4 . :rhe plaintiff sued for a declaration 'that the, defendant '(who ,set ~p
',a .,clalm · of being .adopted by .ihe plaintiff) was not his adopted son. ' Held,"
, that .th.~ plaintiff ,Is entltiP.d.,,to · succeed · Ina;much ' ~s the setting ,up"of . an
',:ado\ltlon alleged to have been made by, the plaintiff' I. such an Infringement
-- ', of ,his ifght ~. , .ole o;",~.r .s. to" entitle the plaintiff to .ue for ~· declaratory. . '

, decr~~'''oin.der : :§,e~tlOn 42 ' lMd) : d~darlng that the person alleged to 'have
• '. . b~'en , adopted Is' not his adopted' son. (Chinn'saml v. Amb.olavana, ,(1906)
',29 Mad : , 4B) , . .0
.' S. The plaintiff sued for ,a dedaratlon that the defendant No. 2 was
not his son and that he was not born to defendant No. 1 (wife of plaintiff!
)
and' for an InJun'ctlan restralnln"g d'efendant ,No. 1 from proclaiming to the
./
world that d'efendant No . 2 was plalntlH's son and from claiming ma intenance
for him as 's uch son . It was contended that the suit would not lie . Held ,
overruling co~tentlon, that havlng . regard to the really serlou's natu~e of
the
the question with which the plaintiff was . faced as soon as an a sse r~lon. .'
"

w,,"s mllide 'that 8 son not admltte4 by 'him had be,en born to his wife , hi s ';.
(plaintiff's) contention as to ,his rl~ht under Section 42 (old) of the SpeCific
Relief 'Act was perfectly reas o nable , and the suit was , therefore, one which
fell within the purview of Section 42 (old) of Ihe SpecifiC Relief Act.
W.kfub" v, Agorslnjl, (1910) 12, Born , L:R , 697)
Kalidas, v. , Parjuam, IS Born . 399 .-Wh ere the plaintiffs were In th e
habit of conducting' pilgrims to a certain temple and of worshipping on
their behalf, the ' defendants, resident priests , prohibited the public 'from
;. en,ferlng the most sacred portion of ·' the temple without the payment of a
fee; the plalnt'lffs were, held entitled to a decree declaratory of their right

. <'.'
to ' free access . ,;
'. . The defendant has denied · or Is In t~rested In denying- the chlJracter
(II)
• J
'. ' ,
. ",-r . '
or the lItie ' or/he pJalnb11. The suit woulci not lie under this section unless
there , Is some present danger or threat to ~ he Interest of the plainti ff. The .'
.' - dedaratlon ~annot be asked for on merely 'speculatlve grounds .
, (III) The declaration ' asked for Is a declaration that ' the plaintiff is
cntll~l1d /0 iI, Jegill chlJrllcter or to right /0 property.
' JllustrlJf/ons
(a) A Is lawfully In possession of certain land , The Inhahlta nts of a
rielg~bourlng ,village claim a . right, or way across the land . A "lay sue for a
. " declaration ' that they are not entitled to ~e' right 50' cla imed .
\'. -'\b): A ~B<lu ~ ihs his properi y ;0: B. c ~ tJ, "to be equally divided
amongst all and each . of t~e~ , ' If :lIvlng at the time of
my death, then
, amongst their' survl.vlng children . N~ such children are in existence. In a '
It

suit against A's executo r, the Court may decla r~ whether B. C and D took
. the property':' absolutelv, or o~ly for their lives and It may also declare the
Interests of ' the children before :thelr ' rights are vested ,
(c) ,A covenants that , If he should at a~y t1r:ne be entitled to property
exceeding of1e lakh of rupees he will ;ettle It upon certain trusts . Be fo re
1

• any such ' prdperty accrues, or any pe rson entitled ~r:'der the tru sts are
l'IScertalned, he, Institutes" a... su it to obtain . a declaration that the covenant Is
.., ,
',' . I void fqr 'uncertainty . . The ~ ourt may make the declaration ,

I
. .. '
,
.. ~4
· .'
,-
,.....
-·-=
. , .- ~~~ "
. ~. ~: ..
•• • 1

_ L_ .. _. - ', , - - - - - -- -_.'-- --

\
•
,

.. 70 THE SPECIFIC REU EF ACT

.'
..
(d) A alienate s to B prope rty in which A has merely a life·inte res L Th e "

alienation' is Invalid 'a'~ :i!'g alnst C, who is entltied a s rever sio ner. The Court , "

may, in a suit by C, against . A and 8 , d ecl ar e that C is ~o en titled.

"
_.
(e) The widow 11 a sonless Hindu alienat es part of the - property of
·.
"

which she is in possession as such. The person presumptively en ·itled to

possess the propertY ,if he survives her may, In a suit against the alienee,
obtain a. decl~ratlon that the ~1i~nat'lon was made without legal necessity.
,I
I
..
•
, _. ~nd was th ~"efo~ e ~ol d .beyond the -widow 's lifetime. .
.:. <0 A Hindu widow .'tn possession . of pro perty ad opts a so n to her
decclIScd · husband. The person presumptively entitled to ' possession of the •
property on her death. withou~ son may In a suit ag~lnst the adopted son ,
obtaln . a d eclaratlqn that adoption wcrs Invalid. (B. U. DL'C. 74)
,. •
(9) A is in po ssession of ctrtain ' property. £1, alleging that he is the
owner of the property. requires A to· deli ver ·it to him. A may obtain a
declaration of his right to hold the property.
(h) A bequ·eaths prope rt y to ·B fo r his life, with rem a.inde r to B's 'wife
•1 and her children. if any , ?y B; but If B dies with out any wife o r child ren .
to c: B has a putative wife , D, and children, but C denies th at Band D
were ever lawfully married. D and h er children may. in B's lifetime,
~ : Institute a suit against C, and obtain th e rein a declaration tilat they a re
:, Jruly the wife and children of B.
:J !
Further Illustrations
i
j r 1. In Secr.lary of Siale v. Jelhabhai, (1£93) 17 Born . 293, the
1 i Mag ist rate made an order agai nst the plaintiff u nder Sectipn 133, Criminal
!' Pro cedure Code, for the rem·ova l of a certain Otta standing in fro·nt o f
1 • plalntlH's s hop, as an obstruction -(0 the public way. Th e plaintiff thereupon
}i brqught a suit against" the Secretary of State for a declaralion that th e land
•
.j •
~L 1
on wh i.c h the Oua stood was his property and not that of the Government. ...
!

,'/'i
HekJ, th·at the public road,. beln~ vested by Section 37 of the Bombay
Land Revenue Code In the Government of Bombay. the Government were - "

.I I
I :
"Int~,es' ed to deny" the pla intirt's title to the land and. therefore, · under
Sectl,," 42 (old) of the Specific Relief Act, the plalntH (s ubje ct to the
.
Ii
I· '
dlrecUC'p of the Court) was entitled to a. declaratlun as aga inst the Government
of hi' right to the ·Iand and the plaintiff could not be c~lIed upon to wait
1
until Government had ~ctually taken possession o f the ·land .
,i
2. Sural, elc. v. . Chunilal, (1906) 8 Born . L.R . 209.- A Receiving
Officer appohi. ted by the Collector under . the Elect ion rules refused to
accept the nomination pap~r of the ' plaintiff, a candidate at a bye-election
for councillorship of the Surat City Muni cipality. and th e list of candidates
that was published ·omltted plalntiH's ~ame from it. The plaintiff thereupo n
sued the Municipality for a declaration that he was entitl ed to come
'. forward as a candidate and for an inhmctlon to prevent 'the Munic ip ality
b
I
from carrying on the bye-electio n wlth.out accepting pla intiff as a candJd~te . :-
I HeJd (1) that the suit· for declaration failed since the Muni<=:ipal ity neith er
i denied nor was Interested to deny the character or right which the plaintiff •

.I!i
sought to establish . It was the Recel\ling OHicer that was concerned with
the quest[on and . over him the Municipality had no cont rol: (2) ' that the
j
1 ;
.:'", .. ..
"'1ii~F.:
. ;~;::.np.~ . . ~"".,..
.. .=':'";' •• ~..........
_ •~.-._ • . _._.
I }-
._-_.~ i .~.
-' " -- .. -
-

..

-
 (

r
, . ~,

'.
-- . » ~f
J
: 1t
...., ~
PECLARATORY DECREES

claim' for Injunction too could nof-be su~t"ined since the -Munlclpall~y . had
done ' no wrong and was threatening to do no wrong: It only proposed to
proceed In accordance with the . ~ct -and the Rules so far as they rela~ed to
71

--.. It.
3. WajlddU ~ Dianutual B, All. , ·31.-A M.homed.n . broug~t" a suit
·.,., against a per~on ' In posses.s lan. . of ce'; taln property for a d"ec1aratlon that
the 'pr6perty w.s w.kf; he 'dld n'o t .Iiege himself to be tnterested tn the '
property further than as being a Mahomedan. He stated, as -his cause of
action, . that the deferidant had In a (or mer suit between the same parties
.filed a written statement denying . that the property was wakf; the sul~ was
• held to be unm.lntaln.ble bec.use the plaintiff did not assert .ny right to
property nor had he any legal character denied. by the defendant.
. ' 4. /3hupadram v. Luchwa Kuer, · 11 All. 253.-A Hindu widow who h.d
•
succeeded to her , husband's estate made a gift thereof to her daughter
who was entitled to inherit on the widow's death: the reversioners ' sued to
Impeach the gift but the suit was -dismissed on the ground that there was
no denial ' of the reversioners' right-the effect of , thp. gift was only to
accelerate the faUer's succession and put her 'by antlclp.",tlo n In possess io n
of the ' "e state"
5. Venkatesh v. Abdul, (1918) 20 Born CR. 667 .-Where the pl.lntlff•.
trustees of a Hindu temple , brought a suit for a declaration under this
section that they were entitled to play music while going In procession
when It pa~sed a Mahomedan mosque situated In a public street , it was
.t' t
held that such a suit would not He Inasmuch as playing music was n'ot one
I
• ,. I of the n.tural uses to which public street ought to bo put. Tho right to
u "s~ a thoroughfare Is a right which a Court mjght properly declare but the ,
': :': right 'to pass . along a street ptayinq mus ic, is not a right which the Courts
ought to recogn ise In. th.,lt sense.
6. SimI v. Ada/, 1935 AIR (p.L) 256.-0rio s. • Hindu died le.vlng
--
."
..... two wldow!'i D and M.. The latter e~ecuted a deed of gift In favour of one
W. A, son of the daughter filed ' sul't ,' after the , death of the Widows,· fo r a
d~claration that the suit property formed pa'rt of the estate of h~s grandfather.
S, and th. t-aftor the de.th of the , widows p """ M, the defendants had
l no right to remain In' the p'oss~ss-'on .. The . plaint did not show that (he
defendants h.d .de.nted the pl~lntiff's title but · It w... · app.rent th.t the
defendants were Inte;ested "In denying his title: " f-IelJ tha~ the suit was
maintainable, a~ the;e ,w as no do-u bt that the ' plaintiff" was ~ntltled to
succeed ' on his mother's death ·arid. the passll)g of the bulk of the estate
Into the hands of , persons who had no right t9 It, did Involve a danger to
0 the ~ estat~" .

. (IV) The plalnlllf Is not In a poslllon to .clalm further relief other than
a bare ' decl.u.Jllon to hJ~ title or lega/..'char.Jcter. If, at the time "of his suit,

r
; the plaintiff Is able to seek tor further relief, hO e will not be allowed m~re
I
~
;.
declar~tory relief If he ' falls to claim such further relief.
t , I i llustratIons
• , A· plaintiff out of pO"!'isession, "suing for a declaration of title ' to land
I o ught t~ pray for possession If the defel ":hint Is In possession " It was
Ir - .. i
..., J'
j
~- "

..'
... .
,- ..... ~. :..- -'

.r: ,"
I; I '
»

--
 ,
\.
\
72 \. l1-iE SPECIFIC REUEF ACf .' J
therefore held in Ch.rdnd.s v. Amirkh.n (1921) 48 Cal. lID, that a suit
for a declaration of righ'r to ' pre-emption wo~ld not lie if .not 'fQllow~d by a "

prayer for consequential relief.. Injunction. and cancellation are h"eld to be

consequential relief.
"
In Vinay Krishna v. Keshav Chandra (AIR 1993 SC 9571, the plaintiff
sought for only a deciaratlo!1 of "her ti't1e ' on the ground . that .she was in
". exclusive p'ossesslon . The defendants pl~ad~d _ that she was not in possessIon
and that the defendants are in possession and that there were also other
tenants. The Court below found against the plaintiff in respect of her
claim to excluslv-," possession. The Supreme Court held that in su~h an •
~vent the relief of possession ought to have 'been asked (or, failure of the
plaintiff to do so undou~tedly bars the discretion of the COllrt In grantln~
the decree for declaration.
•
Ii,j .
1' ,' Jogcsh v. Majmudar, 1932 A.I.R . (Cal.) 714 .-/\ ·.share,holder brought 'a
':::
rI ;,
suit for a declaration that. certain shares issued and allotted to thp. defendants
were void and that the defendants were not cqmpetent to act as share· I,r
holders. Held, that the suit was not maintainable under Sec. 42 (old) as no
Ii:! . legal charact er or right to the plaintiff was denied by t~~ defendant and
Ii '
that in the absence of any consequential relief by way of rectification · of .-:,
.,
registel, removal of names, e tc . , lh e ' suit was al s o : within the mischief of
Ij; the prcviso to o ld Sec. 42 .

,'i::
.1!

' .:
:) i
~ :
follows ,
SUMMARY '
The requisites for grant of a d'eclaratory relief .can be summed up as

(1) T he .plaintiff is, a't the' time of suit, entitled to any legal character
,1 J iI
II " or to any right as to any property.
(2) ' The ' de" ~'ndant has denied or is int'erested in denying the character - :,
i : /1 : or title of the plaintiff. . ', ~ : !
I 'j
i. ! ~ (3) The declaration asked for is a declaration that the plaintiff is
".........
.-
f ,
~
,
:, /. '1
I.
I
entitled to a legal character or to right to property .
. (4) The ,plaintiff Is. not .In a position to claim furth er relief thim the
11
;-
bare declaration 9f his title . .
,!/ i (5) The Court at It~ discretion considers ' It J..-._.u to grant deC"laratorY
II- .
Ii, . relief, ha.vlng j'n view the c1~cumstance.s of the cas __ .
,.
.. :
WHEN DECLA.R.ATORY REUEF IS ReFUSED
, (1) The Court w(~1 not grant relief unless t~ere IS substantial Injury'.
i '
· 1,
Illustrations
(a) ' The executi O. l of a will by 1I Hindu widow does n n t as a general
d rule afford a sufficient reason for graf"\tlng a dc~laratory ~lc:cree ir: fa vo ur
of a reversioner declaring that the will is invalid . for '. the ourpos.e ·. of
Lransferring the estate to the devisee. But where the Court in the deliberate
·exercise of the discretion made such a decree, the Judici~1 Committee
re~used to Interfere: Jai"pal v. BhaiYiJ Inder, 26 All. (A. C .)
•
(b) If the person. who seeks to impugn an aliena~ion made .by a

i limited owner, has only a remote chance of succeeding to 'pro perty, thE'
Court will .refuse to make a declaratory decree. ."
!
:.,'1.... .....
.. i.~ ' .~

. ..... - •. --__ . .. __ . ~. ,c"

. ~, '

.-
 <'
I
,.
'. ' .' .')-,

! DEClARATORY DECREES 73
'< j ".
"
.~ .,. ,r

.'
_
,,r . . (2) II the delendant has .;'ever denl~d the title of the plaintiff or hi;
legal 'c hanict'er: no deciaration will be made regardJng the title 'or the leg81
: '.
." "
I
character of the .p·lalnUff,.~; · . '.,'
~~

• • i . (3) The dedaratorY relief canriot be given to a plaintiff whose conduct

., I eva"ded the Stamp law. ThIs rule is, based
.Is fra'u dulent or to one 'who' had

'' ' i on t~e ' m~xlm of equity th~t h~. -Who, comes to ' eq~lty must come with
clean hands. .
" . ;.. .
(4) No ' declaration .shall be mad"e. "which will be Infruct.':'ou$ o'r useless.
Illustrations
• A declaration In ' ruped of. correctness. or otherwl.se of an ~Jectoral
role when the election was already over,- was h~~d to be, no't obtainable,
because such" declaration would be mere empty and useless one .
•
. . (5) A bare declaration whi~h diclares the disability of the def';'dant to
do the very i\ct which the Court declines to restrain by an , injunction ought
'r,. not to be made.

, ,i'
, -1',.
35 . Effect of declaration,,.A declaration made under tnis
chapter Is binding only on the parties to the suit, persons
claIming through them respectively, and .where any of the parties
are trustees, on the persons for 'w hom, If in ·existence at the
date' of the 'declaratlon, such parties ~ould be trustees .
., Illustrallons
~
., ,
'A, i\ Hindu, .in a suit to whi~h B, his alleged wife, and ,her mother,

. .~ .
are defendants, seeks a declaration that 'hJ.s marriage was duly solemlnlsed
and an order for the restitution ' of conjugal rights. The Court makes , the
declarati-o n and .order. C. claiming that B Is his wife, sues A for the
~ ".
; ';.
+- recovery of B.- The declaration made In the forme; suit Is not bhding
., . upon C, (8. U. Ocl. 73/ . • .

- " <
~
Th!"s section ' provid!.~ that the , d~claratory judgment delivered under
. Section 34 ' Is a Judgment in- personam and not a judgment in ' rem .
• Therefore, this section should be read . lubject to Section 11 of Civil
Pro'c edure Cod~ which l\ys;- do~~ the doc~rine qf res judicata: Veeranna v.
..... S'Y4m"," (1958); A, A,P:.·363 ·(F,B.) .
." '. Therefore, thts section does not extend th~ scope of ,Section 11 of the
, Code of Civil Procedure: A ' decl~rat0!'Y decr-e:e blnd.s :
" (a) the parties to the suit,
(b) persons claiming through parties to th~ suit; and
(c) where any 'of the pa'rties are trwtees on the person for whom, if
In existenCe? at the cf~te 'of the declaration, such parties would b e
trustee's.

- L .'

•
I
\... -
~ .
~- -:"~
... ~ .
..::~

, ,• ~";"'; ? '
-....- .-
.>'
• .. \ ,.~.

'.
-.

.
i-:-, ' !
I;" 1
Ii
,J: Ir t. 74
.r
I,. .,. . PART 1II ,-

OF PREVENTIVE RELIEf: , '~ l'

, "
"

. I r~ .
CHAPT~R VII

"
,INJUNCTIONS
! ,:
<~, TEMPORARY & PERPETUAL
; .'
(Sees. 36 .- 37)
0"",. , 36. ' Preventive .relief how granted. '- Preventive relief Is
granted at the discretion of the Court by ' lnJunctlon, temporary
or perpetual. - -..... - .,... , -"
!-.
\.-<37. Temporary and perpetual injunctions.- (1) T£mporary
Injunctions are such as are to continue until a specified time,
or ' until the further order of the C'o urt, and they may be van ted
at any stage of a suit, and are reg'ulated 'by the ·Code. of Civil
Procedure, 1908.
I , Writ" a shp rl note (2) A pe rpetual injunction can only h e grant ed by the deccae
on : rBm~ra~y
injunction. . made at the h"·"lng and upon th e m eri ts of the ' suit; the
B,U, Apr, 85 defendant is thereby perpetually enjoined from the assertion of
May 87 a right, or from the commission- ~f I,an 'act , which would be
Apr, 89
Apr. 92 contrary to the righ\s of, the plainti ff. \_: , , " : ;( i I
. '. ,..
INJUNCTION DEFINED '
.. It Is a specific order .o f the Cou rt forbidding the' commlSSI'?n of a
What j~ meant by. wrong th.reatened or the continuance of a wrongful cC"lu.rse of action already
r:
i :
an Injunction ? begun, or In some cases (when it Is called a mandatory i;\ju nc'tion) commanding
acttve restitution of the former ~tate of things ."
'.:. "
! DIs4cun ih. prj-
nclp/u gov#rnlng '
. j The best definition is given by Lord Halsblilll..... ·1njunction Is defined by
m.tnda/ory Injun-
ctionl.
hIm . as - -jL!.9icial process whereby A party is o rde red to restra in from doing . ....
S.U. Oet. 8'9 ~~_ !~·~~tli.CJJJ~-I_!£...~t~'_I!_L~.Jner·~- '~'r-; - thr-~~ -'-~h~~ct~-;i-~ii-c~- " or
Injunction. (1) It Is a judicial proc.e ssj (2) Its obJect . Is . to restrain or
preventj (3) . Thing .restralned or . prevented 15 a w~ ong.ful act.
PREVENTIVE RELIEF
Specific relief given · by preventing a party from doing. that which he is ,
under an obligation not to do, is called preventive relief. Part [I( of ' the
. ~- .--- ..- . .
Act deals with Preventive Relief. It is granted at th e ,jiscreti on of. the
Court by injunction, temporary or perpetual : S. 37.
As to whe n-
,, ,
(1) perpetual Injunctions a re gra r:tted, see S . 38 .
(2) mand ato ry injunction is grant ed, see S . 39'.

i
I,
.... .. ..
- .., '-- r
 ,
{

1
'·
. ", .

. -.
':-: -.,

'-
TEMPORARY & PERPETUAL' INJUNCTIONS

(3). injunction cannot be' 'granted" :see S. 41.

(4) Injunction ~an -,be .; grant~d. to , perform, a n~gative , agreement" see
75
, . ~,

S. 42. ' i .. ' "'..I'::' ,' .:... .... . ', '

-..
--
•
Difference between t.emp?~ry1\lrid perpetual InjunctiON
. A temporary inju~ct!o.~ js ~OYi~iOl1al
(~~ peclfled tlm;e . or ' until the' fUfl,her order of the . -Co~~ti but
In its -, nature continuing until a
It does not
&~lude a right. '.t, c,a n he gr:anted at .any p~dod. of sy,lt ,even ex par:.!.! 1
w outd~Uc'e t,o the, othe~ ' party. to ~how .cause : why iL -should - nof be ',
_. granted~ remains In' force till the date of hearing. If not dlssol~~d before
• that date. rn-)nCliithe grant of tempciiarv. InjunCtlciiiSls regulated by th;'

~
.. ~ iI Procedure Code. its object and ~_f_~c:.L~.~~ }.~.,.P!.~~~~~._.~~e, ,~.r~p_~~.t~_ .in
t· , ~ i" Ispute In S(l1(US quo until the final disposal of the case,
• \ J _ : _ _ --~~. - ••

... . . ;1.\. p~rPetual ! injunction, on the other hand, can only be gran,W by a Write., short not~
decree made at the hearing ~nd upon the merits o~e case, It l£!:granted on : Princip/C$ go.
~a, ...dgbt:-'s.E..t.~Jl-tb_ed_.and. it then f<illqYJ.~ , .t~"~_t;r~,~structioncan=-be verning temporary
. injunction.
ma~~:.."or r.e peat'ed in future by ~~~~~;.r. y',~~~Yt;-c.laimih.L~f}·~ .~~.~.':~!.~~. B.U. Oct. 83
nne, · The defendant Is by ' sue" an ,njunctlo;(fJerpetually ' restrained from
~ assertion of a right or from . the commission' Of· 'a'" aclWlilCll' wo-uld be
,c;:o!ltrz.ry to ~h~ right C?f the pl. ~lntiff . .Inu.s, we have-
1. A temporary injunction Is passed by an order during the pend ency Cite ,the v.,rious
of a ' suit : A perpetual injun~tlon can only be granted by the decree made circumstdnc~s

-- at the hea"ring ' and upon th~' merits of the suit. . under which .,
tempor",}, injun·
2 : .A temporary injullction co'~tiriues o nly until a specified time, or ction is gr4nred
until the further order of the Court: A perpetual injunction finally settles dgd insl " dehm-
the mutual rights of the parties and directs a party for all time t6 do, or dtm ( dnd Sidle me
abstain fro.m dOing .3 thing. circumsldnces
3. The effect and object of a tem; f' rary injU!lction is to preserve the which disentitle
rht! re/usdl a/ lli!:TJ-
property in dispute in sla/us 'quo; it doe:> not conclude a right : The effect
.. '.
. and object of a perpetu'al Injunction Is ' to give effect to and protect · the
plainilfl"s right.
pordry injun<;boft1.
B.U. May 93

• 4'. Temporary injunctions a~e-regulated by rules 1 and 2 of Order 39

of the Code of C ivil Procedure ' : Perpetual inju nctions are regulated by 55.
t 55 .to 5T(01dt 01
! . . the Specllic Relief Act.
Interim and perpetual injunctioN distinguished
. An Interim i~lu'(lctlon Is ju~t ' like a temporary Injunction except this
' differen ce ~hat while- the latter Is granted aft er hearing th;(refeni:faril : ~ the '
former is granted e:< parle: Therefore-;--the ~poiiits 'o f 'JiSlinct1cin befWee-rf'1i)
an '-interim ' a~'(r -(irfperpetUal injunctions a~e ' the same as those be tween
temporary and perpetual InJunctions. ,
=\4~ Note that injunction will not be granted when there Is an adequate
relief In damages . - - ..-.-.......
.•. •.....:. - '. - --.: _.'- . ,

,'.'

. ,
 .·f
'I
.. "l
76 i
CHAPTER VIII
T
1':-.

PERPETUAL INJUNCTIONS
(Sees. 38 - 44)
~:·:i8. Perpetual injunction when granted.- (1) Subject . to ' the
..
,"" .j .
v ?' 'other provlslo,u contained In or referred to ' by th is chapter, a
perpetual InJu~ctlon may 'be gr~rited to the plaintiff to prevent ,
the breach of ,m
obllgaUon' exlsUng In his favolir, v.ohether .~
i
. expressly or by ImplicaUon. , i
(2) When any such obligitlon arises from contr'lct, - the Co urt i •

" .
shaH be guided by the rules and provisions contained in Chapter
'11
-=- '-I. ' . , 'D
,
"-5. [.K (I I ~' -I &\. ."' 1A ~:'h. { l , f
. (3) When the defendant Invades or threatens to inva ' e ...
. b t l ...'. . r

the pl~i~llf~s__right · to, or e~joyment _ of property, the court (;~/,.i I," )

may grant a perpetual inj unction tn the follOWing . cases, . i
l1amely,- .
(a) where the defendant Is a trustee of the property for th e
plaintiff; -_ .. _ ............. .. - .,.

(b) ;"'here there exists no stal1dar.d. J.()E . .a~<;erti!ining the a ctual

,.9amage.. _ ~g>l§.ed, or likely to be caused, JlY.. tbe jr:tva~lon;
'(c) where the Invasion is .sucr. that cOl!lpe~atign i.n m9J1ey.... l-
~
would not
_ _ 4 .'_ afford adequate relief; _• . . • .. . _.

(d) where the injunction Is necessary to prevent a multiplicity

~f judicIal proceedings. ,, ' .
~ .../ PERPETUAL INJUNcnONS WHEN GRANTED
::>-Y A perpetual Injunctio n may, at the discretion of the Court, be granted
When wil/ Court · ·-to the plaintiff to prevent the ~reach of an' obligation in qis favour
I
gr.nr . plrp.tu.' whether expressly or by implication, ·When any obTigation arises from
Injwn ,t;t/cn to. • contract, the Court shall be guided by the rules and provisions contained
. p'TtY,.1 In C;:hapter II .
·· l!.U. APr. 82
When 'the ' defendant invades or threatens to Invade the plaintiff's right
Wh_n dotlS II to , or · enjoyment of, prop erty the Court · may grant a ' .perpetual Injunction
" Court grlJ ni p.r· In the follOWing cases, namely:-
petull/ injunction ?
B.U. Apr. 81
Ca) Where the defenpant is • trustee of the property fo r ,the plaintiff.
(b) Where there exi sts no standard for:: ascertain ing the actuar dam~9;e
caused 'o r likely to be caused"!'by th e .Invasion. ,,\, j ,; .
,:IiIi
, " . '

grlJnt P6I'p.tua/ ·, \. '.

/njuncdon ? 'G/~~ 1 "
i/Just1'lltiOM, "
,fc) Where the invas io n Is such thctt cOl"!lp'enS~ltion in m.o ney would not

..', ",: (d)

afford ~dequate relief.
Where the Injunction Is
.'
neCessary to prevent a mLltiplicity of ,
,, .
S,U: Oct. as . :~
Apr. 89 iurl id aJ proceedings : S. 38, j'
.'
, .
:~ .
~ . a __ _ _ •_ _ _ _ • a " _. .* . • , . _, • • __ ......... _ .. . . . _ _ - ; - ; - " ,

"

- -.
 . .,

..., .
, :PERPETUAL-..- INJUNCTIONS
. :
77

.' (.) .'A ~ .:' . ~ ";·:,<~~~: : ·:~;;~~,~f:";t~*·r.~.~~·n~.:· >.-,:' , .~ .",' .' .> ... . ', .
.'
t
,
, '.

".;
-
·
-, ,
U;1ere..out:~
vlolaU~n
lets cert.ln lana "10'''8 , ana .S .contracts not to · dig s.nd . or. gravel
-A may :.~\i~ ·~f~·r· .:.'~W·::··lhl~~t1.o;ri .to . :~e.stralii -'s. ~ n:bml':dig'~fng "'In
of . hI$~· contract.;: · _ :,.= .~ .: . -' .,. :~: .. . ' . •:: ":":: " .:
" ~

· " :, 'Cb)"A t;wtee ~th;eat~'~;:a:':&;i~~h' or-trust. "His -co-trUste'~, ifanv. .should "....
" ",. ~. arid the beneficial ~wne~~ ' ~ay rue
'f~r an InJu.nctior. to prevent the' breach.
• i e) The dlre~tors' of a ~~Ilc .'company are ~bout t~ pay ' a ' dividend out
of caplt~1 or borrowed mon~y. Any
of the shareholder may su~ for an
injunc tion to · restrain tbem. : .
•
•
"
1 •c
(d) ' ThJ dlre~tors 'of ~ . fire ',;nd life Insurance company are about to
·e~gag~ in marine insuranc'e. Apy ~f th~. shareholders may sue for an
Injunctlon to restrain , them.
(e) A, 'a n executor, through misconduct or InsolVency, Is bringing the
'
Writ. " short not.
on : .P.rpelu41
injunCtion: .
B.U. Apr. 90 '
Oct. 92
h .. ~'.... property of the deceased Into danger. ntt' Court may grant an Injunction _. May 94
,...,::\h:(l

-..fJ
,", '), :i_
•.
to restrain hlJ'!l from getting the assets.
(f) A, a trustee for fl, Is about to make an important sale of 8 small
part of the trust propertYi B rna\! sue, for an l,nJunction to restrain the sale,
Wh"t J, m.,n~ by
" n Injunct/on ?
W)urn C4n .("
even though compensation ,In money wowd have been afforded him aoequate
court g'r~nt JHITPtf-
relief.
tu~1 Injunction 10
(g) A makes a settlement (not founded on marriage or .other valuable ' th. pt.ind!( ?
conslder.atlon) of an estate on B and his children. A then contracts to sell B.U. Oct.' 91
the estate to C. 8 or any of his children may sue for an Injunctio n to
restrain the sale.
"" (h) In the course of A 's employment, as Vakil, certain papers belonging
to his cHe nt a,
ca me Into his possession. A threaten.s to make these
papers public , or to communicate their contents t9 a stranger. B may sue
.; ~ -' .... for an Injunction to restrain A from doing '0. (B. U. April 80)
-I.; .
'(I) A Is B's medical adviser. He demands money of B, which' 8 ;
dec lines to pay, A then threatens to ma ke known the effect of 8 •'s
..
,
• commu~lcatlon tq .hlm as a , patl.enl. '. At .
'

This is contrary to A':J- duty and B may sue for ' an f"junction to
•
restrain A from 5~ d0.ing" .
0) A, the owner of two adjoining houses , lets one to B and afterwards
lets the ' other to C,_ A and ,C began to make such alterations I~ the house
let to C as wiII prevent the comfortable enjoyment of the house let to B.
B may :sl.{e for an Injunction to restra in them from so doing.
(k) A lets certain arable land to B for th'e purposes of hu.sbandry but
\~ , without any express contract as t~ ' the mode of cultivation.' C;;ontrary to'
i· the mode of cultivation customary In the district, B threatens to sow the
! '
i lan d. with seed Injurlou5 thereto and req ui ring . many years to eradicate. A
may sue for 'an Injunction to 'r estrain B f~om sowing the land.s In contravention
1 of his Implied cont ra ct to use them In a husbandlike manner.
,.
I ill A, Band C are partners, the part ,"" hlp being determinable at will.
A th/eatens to do an act, tending to the destruct ion of the p'artnership, B
• llIr.d . C may without seeking a dissolu tion o f the partnership sue for lion
InjiJOction ' to restrain A from doing the Act.

• . ' ..

.• . .-
 (, fir --
! !iii'
I
~ :
I"
. 78 THE SPECIFIC REUEF ACT
!. ,'
:: jl
I' II
tI. (m) At 8 and C are members of an undivided Hindu family . .4 cuts
I':·
,",, ~/fiJ' timber growing on the family property and threatens to destroy part oi .the
family house, and to sell some of the family utensils ; B an.d C may s~e ,ior. .
r ~ ;/i;; .an injunction to restrain him.
g'::1" (n) A, the owner of certain houses in Calcutta, becomes, insolven~ 8
~ •i"~•I'i
•
'I"ll
•1 buys them from the C?fficial assignee. and ' enters into possession. A p~r~.ist.s

;I: !!!I In trespassing and on damaging the houses, and B is thereby compelled at
a c:onsiderable expense to employ men to protect" the possess ion. 'B may
sue for an ' injunction to' restrain further acts of trespass.
: Fi!il, Co) The Inhabitants of a Village claim a right of way over A 's land . In
a suit ' against several of them, A obtains a declaratory decree that this' .
... II' land Is subject to no such right. Afterwards each of the other villager~ ,"
I"
_,in , sues A for obstructing his alleged right of way ov~r th~ land . A may 'iue
for an injunction to restrain them. (B. U. Nov. 8(),
,,'," i, "q (p) A, In an adm inistration suit to which a creditor "8 is not a party, ,-I
"

obtains a decrlOle (o r the administration o( C ':; ilssets. B proceeds against I, ' '
C's estate for his debt. A may sue for an injune-tion to restrain ,B.
.: . (q)' A and B are in possedion ot contiguo~~ lands of the mines
underneath th em . A works his mine so as to extend ~der B'j mine and
threatens to rem ove certai n pillars which help to support 8 's mine . B may
" su.·~ ror an injunction restraining A from' so doing . '.
"

tr) A rings b ells, or makes some other unn€ce's sary noise so near a
house as to interfe re materially and unrcaso ll ably with th e ph ysic al c.omfo~t
of the occupier B. B mol!, sue for an injunc ~ioll restraining A from making
th. ",ois,. (8, U. Dec, 74)
(5) A po llutl.!s the air with smoke so as to interfere m at er:ally with the
physical comfort 'of Band C who carry or. busirless ifI a ne ighbouring
house. Band C may sue for an injunction to restrain th e ~\)illLliofl. , '

Jt) A Infring es 8's patent. If the Court is satisfied that the patent is
valid' 'and has been infringed, 8 may obtain an injun,ction to restrain the
Infringement.
(u) A improperly uses the trade mark of B. 8 may obtain an infu·nctlon.
to restrain the user, pl'O ~i ded that 8 's us e of the trade mark is honest.
I! I
, (v) Ai ' a trad esman , holds out B as his partner against the wish and
.i
"
t,, without the authority of 8 . B may sue for an injune.tion to restrain A from
so doing .

i,II
"
:. (w) · A,
the death
a very eminent man,
of ·A and B, C. who
writes letters on famil y top ics tc B. After
[s a res idua ry legatee, prop'oses to make (,
" money ~y publishing A ~s letters. D. who is A 's executor, ha!' ,) property in
'I the leiters and may sue for an Injunction to restra in C from publishing
"
,
; ,I them ,
I
i
I A, a professor, who delivers orally, or dictates to students, ledures or
,I notes 'which are his own literary composition does not communicate
~

1 I,I: .such lectures or not'es to the whole world, so as ' to entitle anyon e to
TepubHsh them without the permission of the professor; they are the
•
.property of the professor and ' not of the students . A is entit le d to r·~ strain

r ;1 "I •
\

r ,' .,,----,-----
~~~."" "- , .•

.
•
.

,,-
 \ '

..~,

,- ' . PERPETUAL " lNJpNCTlONS 79

-.
,"':
, '.
the $'tudent, by Injunction,. from publishing the notes without his consent : .

· ',.. r-t .1 '4

/ .ClIrd Y. Sime.
(x) A carries on eo manu~actory and B Is his asslst~Rt .. In the ~ourse of
his business 'A Imparts to B a secret proc;:ess of value. B _ afterwards
• demaryds money of A, threatenh19, ' In ce.se of refusa"I, to disclose the
1 process to 'c, a rival . m~nufacturer. A. !pay sue -for an Injunction to restrain

• ),- • 1.
B from dlsclc:>s(ng the process : S. 38.
;rt::::.- SCOPE OF S, 38 ' .
-i l S . 38 gives us tfi1i.
g eneral prinCiples on which a perpetual Injunction princ/pl.s which
i \.~ would be granted In cases of contracts and In cases of tort. · This section
• .! govun the grl1'
does not Intro'dLJ~ any new prlnc!'p le of law Into Indlai but ex'presses In nting 01 Il perpe--
generl!;1 terms the rules acted upon by Cpurts of equity In England, and tUIl!injunction by
long since . Introduc~d . In India, because they were In accordance with th. Court.
equity and good conscience . B.U. Apr. 83

7
~
.---IJ .•!, GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Relief by the Issue of an Injunction Is granted on the principle of quia .
timet. The party seeks' the aid of the Court· because he fears (quia time.!1
spme future probable injury to hlL!!..ghts or Inte("ests and not because any- note on the pd'
rnj~'rY has ··alr·eadY accrued ' whi~reqWr-;;-;'~y-'~~'~'p~~;~tion or ' other relief. naples Ilnd provi-

The remedy by way of injunctio n Is ~r~ly discretionary. Section 38 of the

sions which govem
the Uu o f Injun·
o

Specific Relief Act places the gra;rt ot an Injunction . . . - in the discretion of

~ ctions in India .
the Court. T~_~. ~i!cret.Lon , ~.ovte~[,_ !.Ll)5l1..~rp.iJ~_ry.:.~s_~~ry~_~.~~_ r~_~~£.~~~~e, B.U. Oct. 84
gUided _?y'.: jY~J~.~~!.-P-~l£I cJ.p'I.e~ . ~.~.d ..~ap'~~le oL c.o rrecUon , by ..~. .£'?U!~ ..'? f

--
•
, 1 Appeal Thus,
'--_._-.. . . . .
.... the
'. . . or whether
. Court ... has -to- consider
.., .... '-
the thing ought to b,: restrained must produce an Injury,
\...(2) 'whether that Injury can be atoned for by damagu , and
\ -'3) / whether succ.essive actions w?lJld have. to be brought to obtain the
damagses. '
If the . payment of damage.s will not adequately compensate the pl.aintiH
if .s o,

the Court will gra~t an Injun'ctlon, unl~ss there Is special reason against It.
The Court ;"ay refwe an Injunction· and award damages Inst~ad, If the
Injury Is (I) 'mall, lind (II) cOEable of being 'e,lImated In money a-;;;r-oT
Berng a'd;'qu'at'"eiy-'com'pe;'uaW' by' a -;~all-;'uni',' !'nd -to-grant"an-rriJurfc:ticfri'
w'Oulii ·b·;- ·OPP~~SSiv~.~:f)n InJ~~~tlon . may also b!! ~~fu;ciro'n ' the 'g'rC;u~d "of i .i
'"1he ' plal~tlff$ acqulb~nce . anQ;j'd~lay , Slmila.r1y Injunctions should not be C~4"\";."' ''·'''' ~ ,.'J
granted where they Inflict more';n,ury Qn the person sought to .be Injuncted " . ! .-; ' , ~ '1 ~ , ,' . ,
"

than advantage on the applicant: Tiluram v. CohenJ 32 I.A. 185. \"

r~ D~rdb Cawasjee Warden v. Co.oni Sorab Warden lAIR 1990 SC rI o.:.. ~~ . . ·f
8671, a family dwelling ' house was · jointly owned by the plaintiff and X \,. ' .1
who was his brother's wife . X latez:- sold her undivided share to a stranger. '!. : .. -
In a suit for partition by the plaintiff, h.e was held entitled ' to restrain the ' I . · • .'

. vende,e fron;t possessing his s~llre In the dwelling . house as Irreparllble

• injury' was likely to' result if a stranger transferee Is allowed to possess the
undivided family dwelling house.
.., . In Modi Threads Ltd. v. Som 500/ Gola Factory lAIR 1.9 92 Del 1)
where X the owner of a registered trade mark had transferred' It to' M and
"-
, " , "

-.
.-
• '

,
 , "
'\; l\{ ,,!"
~ \-,),

~~"r ' j THE SPECIFIC REUEF ACT

,
~
"
r while M 's , application for transfer In Its n:arne was pending In the office
, "
of the Registration ' of Trade -Marks, the trade mark was violated by
certain 'bnscrupulous persons. M field lin action in a Court of L~w for L
'; Injunction . It was held that, although M's application for transfer ts still
pending, it is prima facie clear to the court that during the pen.dency-. of
the . ,application the dishonest persons ClInnet be allow'ed to make ' use
1)( the said Tra-le Mark to Illegally enrich themselves and . thereby e.lJrn
upon the reputation built up by that trade mark by the predecessor-in-
.. .... ~est . of M., ''-'-j J
' " . I.-
. . . •. f1
~
. ',- '/ -:- It is to be noted, however"that where injlJnction- sought to restrain
. . lJh.e. breach ' of a negative contract, the Court has no discretion to exercise.
. /"'< ,-i.I , RULE IN 'TULK v, MOXHA y .. ,-J I I
~ As a general rul e no o ne can sue or be sued for an injunction to
restrain the breach of a· co ntract unless h e is a party to · the contract. The
! I., " ' "
01'. ~Ie in Tulk v.· MoxhlJY, is one Qf ti)e exceptions to th is .general rule . The
rule In Tulk v. · Moxhay, Is to the ellect that, a restrictive covenant
entered Into py an owner, Qr · lessee of lan~ Is enforceable . In equity
against any subsequent o~ner, tenant o r occupier, - ex ce pt a porcha.ser for
value.. who obta ins the . legal ~stllte In lhe land without no tice of th e
covenant. In. ordt:;r that this rule should apply , the covenant-
(1) ·must be · negative, I.e., not Involving expenditu re .
on N_gIIUv.
COV1UJ4nt. • . (2) must .slmply restrict th e user of the land , and
B,U. , Oct. 92 (~) must bind la nd of the covenantor for the benefit of the land of the
covenantee. ra
Under this rule, a coven ant restricting the us er of land will be enforced
by Injunctic;m, at the suit of lhe owner of othe r land to whit.:h the . ben efit
of the r·est rJctio n Is a~tached, against "II persons who .subsequently own or
~ ". , ,:'
occupy the burdened ·Ia nd unless they ubtaln a legal estate for value -:'., '. L
/ "..
'
. WrIt_ short hot_
on : . !of,mid/ory
Without actual or c~nstruc tlve notice of the covenant: in Re Nisbet and
Potts.
'V" ~9. Mandatwy injunctfons,-When, to ptevent the breach of
.! :: t~ ,·
r
,

.'.~I
Injunction. an obligation, it ' is necessary to compel the performance of
B,U. May 54 ,
c~rtaln ' acts which the Court Is capable of e'nforclng, the Court i
Oct. 86' t
Oct. 87 may In Its discretion grant an injunctIon to prev2nt the breach
May 91 complained of, and also to compel performance of the requisite
acts,
IIlustra/lons
. 1. A, by new buildings, obstructs lights to the acceH and use of wh ich
B has acquired a right under the Indhlin Limitation Act, Part IV . B may
obtal·n an injunction not only to reslrain A from going on l).Iith the
buil~lngs, but a lso to pull down sc. much of them as obstruct S 's light.
•
·2. A builds, a house with eaves projecting over S 's -Iand . 8 may sue
for an Injunction to pull down so
much of the eaves as so ~roJect . •
,
. . 3 . A ·thr~atens to publish statemen'ts concerning B which would be
puunishabJe under Chapter XXI of the Indian Penal Cod·e , rhe Cou rt may

"

.r p

I
. .
,,I

"
 , /
"

[, I ,
,
I'
I.
; ,
'.. i .
-, , .'
.'8
. . .,)) .... .
.. ~
, ,
• '. -. .~
" ..

, ,:. /
'

•
\ 't'
.,." '. '.-

~
I , ;'
:;.' .
•.' ., f" t .
-
~
,
--• I
~ ;
~ i· .' "
f.
for JUs an order~fofputtingt 'i~~~~~!r~t!r.:~t!:~~~t~!';i
the ;;~;pos. :-, .. . " , ....
;11- NAruRE' Its""'(' )i"~~t~~~6tt~;~~~~~~~~~~~:
, ;
~

"
,r~.=J.
N . ','.'
him, It Is, the;dore, In

Th;s reflef 'Is app"U,',a,b.le,'uto" ,:,the breach .of any ' ,obligatton whether .\ '\~'
" ,.' .'
,.
• I
~. arising out of contract for . [t : ~may . be perpetual or . temporary. though Whal is of: tnIlne/., ·
,lory injunction ?
.i In'' very rare c~ues a,' . temporary :lnJunctlon of this nature is Issued. A.n
/,' I
Elucie/4fe the prj.
" JnJunction is, ' in Its , n.iu;e,'"piohibi,to'ry.' The defend,ant , Is. first, called upon nciplgs governing
I
'\ to . restore the place to .the .p'O"s ltio n .. in . which !t· was . before .:the act.;was n1dndlJtory injun-
done and then he is restraln,ed ,wh4!n he .- has ' 50 ,restored it • . from doing '. clions.
./ anything in respect of It whlch wouid b'e breach :of obligation on 'his pari. B,U, Nov, 82 '
,/ The object in every ca;'e ii 'to', c6m~e( the 4efend~nt l(; ·.'· ~~s·to~e thl"0 95)O , ; Apr . 92
I their former co'n dition. :The Jurisdiction \to frlake such" an" order has to be_ .
!
j exercised' with great caution and ':(6 be :resorted -fa ' only where ··the remedy '
Is Inadeq~ate for the purpo se of. d~sllce'~ a'1d the restorlng things to .the ir
former condition is the only r:emedy whir h would meet the requlrem.e nt. of
.. . . ., t~e case. Whe;e co~pensation J's ' PO,s sib le " or there 'has 'bee~ an ' undue
;'
delay, '" the Court will gT~nt ' ~ mandatory :fnjunction to .prevent 'extn!me or
very serious Injury:
," ~4 " , " ,., CASES
A lenant of an
#
. Lane v. Newdgllte, 10 Ves .. 192.-A leased hls ' land to B for erecting
.tgriCUJIUf"J hoMing

., " .-
~

~,
f \V'C mtHs and boun~ himself t? :S,upply .w.at.e~ ~heret? fro~ . c~na~ 1lnd rese",":Qlrs
~ on hi. ' own land._ A Imped~d the enJoyment , of ",ater by , B by, keeping
works out of repair by the we of. locks, and by removing stop gate'. : B
pl.Jn t~e/ his jute
with nJ4ngo tr_a
. to :. thll. icnowleclge
.. a's'k ed for. lItn Injunction whIch. was'. granted ; in this case even " afflrmative ·but without" ./h. ,
'... '. i covenant~ ' were enforc~dj. the . ques,t1on. arises .. whether such cove~an~s . c~n
be enforced .ag~inst suc~ess~rs C?f, A; .~cc9rding .to , Tulkv .. Moxhay, pe~haps
consent 01 hi~
:·J.tndiorcl . & Ihtu
.! the~ ~ uld noi -be, ' ' . , ..' '-, • ' .' • -' .. : ' ", ' changed the ch"ra-'
!
;~ . J.' :J~y~ha:ndr~" ' v: " R~;;roc~um> 14 ' Cat: .i:3'6,-A ' and ' B were ' co-snarers , cler of the IIlnd.
Alter more th.,n 3
\ .f owners of certain prop~rty. ' S excavated a 'tank on 'a part of : the land, A
." til\ i
yurs Ihe ' /dndlorcJ
<t , l.~ j ~ued -for an order : that the ·land , on which the "tank was excavat~d without sued lor M4ne/,,·

' 'yj;' :.2: A 's ~onsent ' should

) \.J
be
restored ' t~ . its : f~rmer poslti ~n;' injune't ion was
)_~efused on the ground ' that A had n~t' ~hown an·. in.iury ' by S's act which
materially aff~cted his position . The mere fact that the land o'ut 'of which
tory injunction to
h4vt! Iht! mango
trees r~"oved, ·

, \\:~ " . ' ~ \ . It· has been excavated \I,.''''.s .fit for cultivation is not ·an Injury of a substantial
n~ture necesslta.tlng a man~ator¥ inju,:c.tion.
Is the I"ndlol
entitled to th.
orc/liT of MdQc/a·

i~'
; )r Krehl v . . Burre,/!, 7 CH.D . . 5S .-A, despite repeate~ .w arning from the
plain~tiH B,' . perslsted , In building a cou;t'yard 'o ver which 8 . had right of
tory Injunction ?
B ,U, Oct. 85
• . . way to his shop and had nfused term~ and co mpensation which It had
... .~ ~ agreed to accept, Though the building Y'as buil ~ at 'enormous 'c ost It was
,:.•.- ordered to be remcwed. ' .
\.s,
,\~ -(' ~.
I "

..- . ....
'\. ,;' \:.

•
.•"'".. ~

•
...--

.,:

82 THE SPECIFIC REUEF ACT

. R.S.M. Gounder v. Annamal.1 (1981) AIR Mad . 237. - The defendant

rJv . . . put up a structure o n plaintiff' s. !and. Plaintiff who ~as. living only a . ll1i1e
vU\,. ~/ ~ ' away stood .by and waited for the stucture to be completed . ~hen h~ sued

:"t
\) J\
::, '\ 'V 6' ~;~~ for possessIon of the land as owner and for a mandatory injunction _to
~demolish the structure. In the circumstances the plaintff was held . not

" XV\F' ~Instead awarde~

. ~ entitled to injunction on the' ground of delay and acquiescence but was
only compensation
U»l~~rmce betweeq perpetu"," lnJWlctlons an4 mandatory Injunctions
equl~alent to market price of the land.

In 'whGt r.sp*ct1' \" ', .' 'A Pe.rp· ~tual hiJunctlon Is : grant~d to 'the p.laintiff 'to prevent the ' brea~h
do.;. ~.tual oi an obligation . eXisting· In his favour whether expressly or by Implicatlqn.
" . Injuncl/on ·· alf,,, f\\The guiding principle here I. that the party · .eeks the aid of the Court
" -!rott:':• .m~n~f~ ~ecause he fears -In some future, probab!~ Injury to his rights or interest!'.
~- ?n,:~::~!,:: ';1 ·
_ I,' t ~\\ • .,
',.
t't. -84
·ern the other hand-~ ·;ry~;'·d~·i~~Y~tnfundloq,~ ·o-n~·~~!~!<.~?~j.~·~~: ·p.~.rt9i.roJr~~~.
~.!.~~_<:.~~. [n perpetual mJ~.~"or a .!!u.!~ .~.!~p'~~~d .~I \ . ~~le .9 ~f~nd~nt
I.!. f\ \(\'\', ') I.l O;: . ,' .,\';, to ·· abstain from doing s o methl~.~.hereas, in the cas e of a mandatory
. V.'I' I', , \~ " ,\ ..\ : " \1 .rnfun~~~~ ~t~~.··~~~~~ or~ ~r.s ..p~~{?r~.~ ·~ ·~ .~ ·o (~ . ~~SitiV~_ dut~. Both .t.~ ~r types
\~~ '''.. ~ . .~., •.~ ' ~ .I; njU~Ctlons are. artll e discretion of the Court. ~~"tv\l ~ ','
'''.
_.
. ~/.
1t'/ ,
~,~. . . - 40. Damages In' jieu :01,- 'or In addition to, ~njunction.-(l)
/. . \.lJh~ ' plalntiff In a ' suit for perp'e tual Injunction un der S ec. 38 .
.v\
or · mandatory Injunction under Sec. 39. ma~la l m damages
. . .·7. .elther In addition to. or In substitution for, such injunction and
, . 71 . the Court may; .If It thinks fit, award such damages .
•~..." (Z) .N; relief for damages shall be granted .. under th is section
; i, '\~/' . : unless the plaintiff has claimed such relief in his plai nt
1·
./
8
,,~ 'n'." .. ·. ,..
..'.-What. " .i. ,,~ · th,
Provided that where no such damages 'have been claimed In
the plaint. · the Court shall, at any stage of the proceedi ng all ow
, .- " ca••i ·',);' ·.,·whlch th¢' 'plalntlff to amend the plaint on such terms as may be ·jus t
..
~
· t ' :t;:~;;!";;;~::.;: , !0(J~cly.5ling ,such claim; . ' .
.of _;' ,, ' iI>. Y;p«J!lo R~J. .• ;,. (3).tThe . dismlssCiI of a' suit to prevent the breach of an
,.. ~ '., -· ' Act p~ .." ••" , ...... obligation' existing In ·favour of the . pJalntlf( shall bar his right
.,;
- '. '.:ty
'':!")-!-.-:' B . U :~"Ap;..:·' 80 ,. . .
f
'*
1 . ' •

f. ) . ' i~ 0¢'.' 81 to·;·s ue for.··oarr,ages for such breach.

~ J .~ . ~llnj~ncijoJls when refused'-An injunction cannot be .. granted
'- r . "~ ', ,::'.

!; ." '.' . ' . (a) to restrain anY person from prosecuting a judicial proceed ing
. t· ' ,: ~ '.'.:.
pending at the institution of the suit in which. the injunction .
-~ . : ,. : • . -. \ - 1.' ••• • •
0}....
is s·ought ; · unless such restraint is necessary to prevent a
t . " ~'. ,

multipilcity of proceedings;
i ',' '
l. . . J
...• : .. .' . 1... . c) .';'" ·.(b) to . restrain any person from Instituting or prosecuting
.. . ' ', . '1. I;:' \ ". . ,. any proceeding jn a Court not s~"ate to that from
•
i", ';:'1/ "" 'C-' ,~.~./ which the ,injUnCtion Is ·sough2~"{':>"".! a....... . (~ I.,p., ~. i·'~}..0
,. .. \, '/..J< ", '-'.
(c) to · restrain any person 'from ~pplying -to any legislati ve
'i1 :. body;

------ -_.- -- - '.-.. _--_ '.,-.. ,- ".- ~ .

-..
'-
.' •
j
~.

~/,
<' ~ --
 ,'
, J
PERPr:TP~_~~~~Ju~mQ~S ,~ ~~.~% ~3.;~ : ~
• " .~ .' -,. \ " • • •J . I ' • . ' •
..

- {dna -'_restrain ':a-ny ,jp!id;pili>.fioiil ~'lnstltutlrig ~""r"~prosec\ltlng ~,'=" · i.i-";' ."

. . ' . '''~t..; ~.; ah
ynpfoce ~!di iigiftjn~'\lf~l~';l~.a:lf.irha iter;~ ~a9;i~~.~~"':'i.l ~!4,:"!,,;·:;·:t>i,,.~~: ', ,:. <~.'~rJ.r.h·/6· "" ., ~ ,'1',
, . ~H 1· 'J ' I;:~~·\l. ~Q' ·.\\tl · ' .1,11, ·.,l :J 4d~~~'~ Wt'H .?!rl ~ (.11. \1 I.-:~ri{:l;: _: : i !. ~··~rn lif~i!Rr:·{ .:",w) a.,. . !'~~ .:. \ . "
"' :_ - " , ~ebto ,: 'p_~~Yfant .t1)~_ ,b!-~~tJi:;?~- I~ ",~p,n\r-a~t ,th!l"p.!lW?@ilg,~ib;~III -' !-" \ " \,'_" "" '. c -
-: ':o::,wnlch -w(;lUld , n6t -'b~~pealflc.ally-._~nforced;:,_ "'.'R _, j",,; '!,I~";-iw 'I"'''..... <-" ,,'y-
\ ,,>,' (f)·;'f6" ;Pfet'ehf; ':Ori;i!h'~VWbG~.f'Of~hlllsa~ce..;'ah- a-ct -. of . which - ~ ~~\'~~I-:~(~ ::',"'~~
• - '--'It '15 ---riot ! ~eas onably '_CIea'i-"that ' It will be 'a nuisance; ' . ,' ',..,--
. ' .:. ~ • .. . , . , .: " . • \ . ,'. , { .... . / .j"·!,f ; .... '. ,". , ". . .' .• .•. i . · Write, .hort note
(g) ..t~ prevent a c;ontlnulng . b~ea_ch-_ In which the plaintiff -on .'- Injunction
;(' -)- acqwesced; ' - - (' ~<A ' f- - . ' ' b b 'd ..n~B.';;~-::. ,~ '
h when equally efficaCious relle can certainly e -0 talne " .
, by any otller u;;Jai in'Ode cif- proceeding ' except In case' of DlscU$$ th. clr·
• b h f cums/lJ{tCftt ·untJ.,

. ,l' " - r_eac '0 tru~t; :_

1) when the conduct , of plaintiff or his agents has been
such as to disent (tle him-- to the assistance of toe _Gourt;
wMch tho Courts
or, bound - to
"fuseth, groot of

J
. . . Injunction, ..
;,
0) w~en the plaintiff has no''- personal Interest In the- matter_ B.U._ NOY_ 80

I
\
Illus/r4lions
(a) A seeks an Injunc ti o n to restrain his pa rtn er B, fr~ m . receiving the
partne~shi p:debts and ,e ffec ts. It a p pears that ~ had Imprope~ly possessed
u \ •. himself. of the books of th e firm a nd refused 8 access to them. The Court
will relwe the InJunction. lB. U. June .74, April, 83).
" :.

,.:t {b) A manufactures and sells crucibles, designating them as "patent

plumbago crucibles " though, in fact, they have never been patented . B
pirates the designation . A cannot" obtain an injunct'ion to rest rain piracy,
(B_ U. 'Dec_ 7.4, Nov_ 82)
_ ~2 . Injuncthn to p erform n-egative agreement.- Notwithstanding Write 11 $horf noIt!!
"""'-ahyth!ng
- contained In clause (e) 01 Section 41, where a contract on : ·'njuncikJn 10
pt!!rfomr NtIf1Itw.
comprlse~ an affirmative agreement to do a certain act, coupled Agrlena7t·,
-, with a _negative agreement ; express or Implied, not to do a B.U. Nov_ 80
" .~ . "{:
certain act, the circumstance that the Court -Is unable -to
Noy.82
...'\• Ap", 88
, compel specific. performance of the affirmative agre'ement shall
not ,preclude it from granting -an injun'ctlo!) _
negative agreemen( _- ,. - --,
perform the
- ___ " ,- - -'. -; -, -.
to
PrOVided that the plalntlff '-has - not failed to perform the
contract so far as It Is b!ndlng on him.
Illus/ra/lon/
(a) A conlracts to sell to' B for Ri_l ,OOO the goodwill ' of a certain
business ' un c onnect~d wi th bus iness premi; es , and further agrees not to
carry on that business In Calcutta . B pays Rs, 1,000 but A carrle..s on the
bus lnessJn ~alcutta . The Court -can·not · compel A to send his cu.sto~ers to
• B. (;jut ..~ . may O?taln on Injunc$lon re.stralnlng A fr~m carrying on the
business In Calcutta, . . .

..
. .
..
~. T
• . 7
-J
• ,-. I,
.,
,

r
.1
--------- .---.-----~-----
~~----------------------------------------------------------------------------~

I.
iI
Ii(i 84 THE SPECIFIC REUEF ACT
~ Problem- A "g- (b) A contracts to 'sell to B the go odwill of a busin ess. A then sets up
r r6...d "nd co~n"n'
'to
!;o s,rv. B for
a similar business close by 8 's '.shop. an'd solicits his old cus tomers to ' de ;)1
with · him. This Is contrary to hl~ ' I~plied contract, and 8 may obtain an
t
I !
-" . p-r1or!' 01 3
. ·J.'IMtX.,. wuYlng
InJ~nction to-: rutrain A from soliciting the customers, Zlnd from any act
I ' :~ whereby their goodwill may be withdrawn from B~ . '. ~
~:;··n..,uu ."d during
rI tho ...W p<triod h. . ~ contr~cts with B to sln~ for twelve ~ont.hs at 'S "s theatre and
". • houJd not . 6CC.pt not to .si.n g In public elsewhere. 8 c~nnot obtain specific. performance ;'f
r,1 I tiny.! oUJfIT sim/JM. . the contract 10 sing, but h'e Is entitled to an I~junction restraining A from
! f OmpIo_torlio- singing ~t any other plac e" of public entertainment. (B. u . M.,y 76, /tillY 84)
iI
i
!
,
i I
! rlr, u .:·• .'i W . . vJng
:' mu/.it\ fi:ir.::J IJny.
. -'";;'thu' em~.
_Allu ·on. :yur. "A
as:
, (d) 8 contracts with A that he wi:! serve him faithfully twelve months
clerk.". A ' Is not entitled to a decree lor specific performance of this
contr,act. But he Is entitled to an injunction res tra ining B from' serving a
.-
:-j
"
•

•
·.Wt ,/Ji. •.• ~·.o{ rival house as a c! e rk.

,
'(
i
" " ,-B ·and .."t..-.,J .th. . (e)' A 'contracts with '8 ' that in consideration of Rs . 1,000 to be p.lld to

I,
.• .,.,,;c,, :,ol~C · u .• .) him by B on a 'd ay fixed, he will not set up a certain business wit hin a
• "&wiIVJn.sz I1lIIst.,..;~. : ,
..8 fila .uu. :6g4lnst
specified distance . B fails to pay the money. A cannot be restrained
frof!"" carrying on the bus iness within th e s pecified distance. (B ecause
f "
,!
,
A ·{or. .n /nJunctk,n
to rll$,t r.ln A from ' 8 - has fa iled to "erform his part of the contract). !But Sec. 27 d th e .1)
,f" s.rvlng C In Indian Contract .' \ct, 1872 s eems to make the agr e ement wh~lIy void .]
1'
i bu.cn ' of th. (B.U. Apr. . 85)
l;
.- nllglltlv. cov«fJlJnt. , NOTE :"llIus t!"ations (a} and (c) are examp les of affirmative and exp r ess
Woukl B sU<:CflIKi
.g.Jn.,
A ?
o'e gatlv'e ·agr eem·ents . Illus tration; (b) and (d) a re examples of ex pr ess
affirmati ve and Implied negative agreements .
S.U. May 86 '
SCOPE
Section 42 embodies the prinCiple la id down in . the leading case (I f
Lumley v.' ·W<MJn..eJ. (1852) 1 D.M.G. 604, where the facts we re as In
•., .
"

illustration Ie). It is ' an exception to the general rule in Section 41(e). to

the-;effect :that there can be no I~junctlon where there can be no specific
' C" :" :,:'::"' .' .:.... . ,-1
p~fqrrnance. This section Is limited only to ca-ses ·.of obligations ' arising i
·;' :: I~.•.!.·.Vt •., ...• '\ . ....
R':I'~'~tg{: cont~~ct. . "W~ ge~ from S~.ction 12 that where ' the ' contract' Is
. dlvlsl~le, · I.~ " one part 'stands pn a separate and Independent footing fr om
,I,
. another; part, 'the ~ Court will enforc'e specific performance of ' Lat · ·part i f
which;:·" ca.pabl e ~f .specific ' performance although the other cannot be.
.1
The reaso.n of .the . rule being that In such a case the parts are In
t"e~~lv~ Independent 'c'o ntracts; thE! same analogy, it ' sh~uld be ' noted, (
applIes 'to Section 42 'r elat ing to granting of injunctions . It would therefore
be correct to say that Sectio n 42 Is to injunctions what Section i2 ' Is to
be specific perfo rmance. All that Is necessary is that-
(I) there should be two agreementsj
:1
(Ii) they must b~ divisible;
... ... (III) .t he negative agreement may be expre.ss or impli ed; . J! •
~-
, .
(iv) the applicant must no t ha ve failed to perform the cont ra ct so far it '.
is blndln.9 qn him .
. If so, the branch .of th e negat ive .one is r estrain e d, ·I.e ., a p art o f the
I
agreement 'Is enforced though the affirmative part , i. e. , ·the other pa rt .~ .
ca-nnot be sp·ecifi~~.ally enforced.

-"'.
, j.
 > ••

. ~

,
-..

Into were ' such as ' td give ; unfair advantage over

. Within ··the ';'ea:nlng of Clalne" l ,<>,. ·Sectlon 20 of thl., Act.

In !linerjc~n'
Express
269), the Supr~~e Court
iJi';;k·'lid.
hai ,/ C8/~""II. ·SieeJ C~:·~·I~;:~~e~;;~~0
"held that "the Jurisdic~lon to '
• l!.nd deciar.atory reUd under : the Specific Relief Act Is
,
must . be exercised according 'to ':$ound principles of .law and ex' ,debllo
jU;/itlo . . The plaintiff canndt c1~lm the relief as of rJ,ght. Sefore refusing or. . " ~

granting ·an Injunction . or: - de,claratlpn cir "both the court must weigh. the
-',-pros and cons ' ln . each cas£l; consider the facts and circumstances. In its
" ' p;oper _perspective aQd exer~lse dlscreU~n with circumsp~ctlon to ' further
the .ends of Justice" " :,: ,
INJUNCTIQN TO . RESTRAIN UBa
An injunction is given at th~ hearing i.e ., disposal of the suit generally.
But it can be r~trained b yr. an ' inte-r1ocutory injuncti l) n 'when , there is a
'Clear case. It Is only , when Injury I.s wholly unjustHia:bl(" and Jllro ious libel
Is likely to cause IITe'parable iinjury to the applicant that the Court would
grant this remedy on an interlocutory application .
. .. UGH,\: AND · AIR CASES
When a person bUilds' ··nea~. the ho~se of ' another so as to darken' his '
. -'.- ' wind qws agalns t "the de,!r rIght " or= the, latt~r either ' by contract or by

- .
•
ancient possisslon , the '(:mirt Jljtiiferes, by : an i~junctlar:t .:.:'e xcept 'where;
~~mages w~uld .~e ' ~ s~t:isJant ~al " ~~l!1pen,saiion', The only test followed Is
whether the amOL'nt of Iigh,t JefL~fhir the - obstructton 1s such as' would
;unrcrmt -for-aU~i'nary ' purpos~$ ':'AIi that ' Is 'ne~~sarY ' Is " thaf' -there
"e '
, ',..sho~li:·riot " b~"' ot"stnJcti~~,~'s-o "as ;-tri 'Imalerlally ' reduce': the , a~~~~t : '6" iignC "
", a"ct?USrd"!:'~'(.tO_,,~~~Lihl;'pl.ace .'· :~ne , mere ,fact that' It Is nof 'sufflclent" for
.- " - - . -, - _T ' . , ~
-
,any ~UTPOS~ ''.!.e~~~-:t~y . o.r~Jnar·y , Iigh~ Is.' " ..ot' .4 ground for an ~ JnJunctJonj in
sudrcases damagei alone would ~·be' awarded. The same ' prtnclples '-apply
f~ If\dl,~~ ,'~, . .; ',~. .,. ,~. . -- .. {:
,..
I, It 'affords ,ground for clvil..action .~n.ly ,
a-ction c'an
1,Ie If ' the nUlsahc'e Is legalised by ,
r ~ slralned . 'only - If.:the mlsch"lCf Is ' Irreparable ~ and Is'
g-devanc'e. The ' .'leit Is "whether 'there '- Is such "a-n ~ ,';,,,,;;;;;
whrc::'h~terlally Interleres with th~'· ordinary com(oh
existenc e:' In case of ·a Pu~,..Jic ... nuis6nce the · ordlnary ,.,moW ~!1~'
actlcm, But under · the new Civil Procedure 'Code of
to th'~ Advocate-General to move a ' ~ivil CourJ
injunc tion ,

...
)
" .,.
, ~"

/ ,',
(

.
':::r
,.
-\ --
-';---

.'''-
~r-------------------------------------- __~

86 "Ih<
u';s v. FIOnn:e : : : : 1 ) 7~:E::59- The defendant purchased 'Il ! ;;.
J,t>:n' ..
a. ~hop. in a ' r ~~identlal loca!.ity which had ~nack bars, restaurants and'1o~~er. '11/7 " ~
:- .
.shop! and.._converted it into a ' 'sex centre ....~rid cinema club' .. where. blue ' {t 'tr
mrp.s were qhiblted. The residents brought~ an a'cLion for injunction and ,~t ...
damages and _ ·~I~o...~ sought an, Interlocutory ' injunction on the ground that ~ ~.
. ~"-.~--....-";:~~' ~p'ening>oC.ihe
th. shop will be embarrassing to the residents and a , _.f~:.';'1: '
~::...~- .. , '. ·. . . . OutCe-. of danpet to young p~ople·..partJcularly girls who might be exposed ..
. to .Ind ecent , su~~ttions by outslders ., JllM.·."C'Olirt...q.~~d, ~" '\n:"lo,c,Ytory
. ..... . . .... ~.
..
.: iDJ~nction a~.d !1elo\t~~~ c~t)rilo1sanc¢ were not confined to ca.$'es I ;' ?~-
.' '
phy.lca.l· '-dbcomiorl ....buVa lso Included cases Invo lving Interference w:th 9..... . ))~
'. "'' 1"/'' .
:. r.~~nl'bl.~ ..dome.tlc enjoyment of their property. ~i' .' "
. " ~~ ." . ' / ~ .
I .-
i ,. ~' /~nJ~~:t1:~' w::s;:~t~h~:c~es~~ai~~~~e (~:: o~ ~~~d ~i~u:te ~n4 t~~~:;~in~;y :~
1
\ f; i h' ~
a residential .Iocality as cernelry as burial o f th e dead in suc h a place is, . ;-~)- I
- likely to cause nuisance. . :-:' . \
-~.'
'; - -
.-'-
CASES
r" ,
!U;n,..J ·
Sarcar v: BiJlrdhim Co., 15 C.W.N 289.-A Joint stock company cannot . !~ .~
be restrained by Injunction from di 5mlssing~ its management agent even
though the contract of service. provides that he is to be rem oved after a ~!Lr
".
specified period ; th e only remed y of the agent in case of wrongfui dismissal
I~ a suit for damages . (8. U. May 7~
~ r:.;~
; ,
.
A agrees to take from B the whole of the elec tric energy required fo '- h;.'~ ":'1.
hb premises . But though 8's supply is .·regu la r, A takes sOfT\e of the'
energy required .from C B may ob tain injunction to prevent A from takir.g '" {~li
" '.~
~ny electric energy from C; (or in 'subslance the a.g reement means that A
will not take. any electric energy required for his premises from · anyone
"",cept. B ; Metropolitan £/ec/ri' Supply Co. Ltd. v. Ginder, (1901) 2 Ch. 79'}. l •• :"

In, A,!tcher v. Mon~gomery, A engaged B who was . a provincial actor:

to , a~l . at N.s theatre. II} London for .a certain periodj B came tn ' L9 ndol1 :., . .... _
.,!d :.w~ '!Iillirig
.
to act for A. But though A paid B his salary, he. kept. him :?-
~ .' r, , .
;
Idl~ for. fiv1! , mont.h s and . then B e!lsaged . hirnself ~o act' elsewher~ . A sued. .: .~. e-;
fOr JnJul1cUonj It was n;fus~d 9n .th~ ground thllt A had failed to 'p~~rorm 1. . }
hlJ' , part of, the ~ontract ; mere payment of salary would not be ~ sufficient 1. ' ~
p'~rI~~~nG«.~ , ' . M { • )'

. M.d"" RIy... Co. ·v•. Rus!, (1891) 14 . Ma~ . 18.- The defendant signed t "
an ' agre.m.~mt with the plaintiff c~mpany whereby he contracted to serv~
. tho Co. for 4 years In . India under a penalty Qf E 100. After two years..
the ' defendant left the service for that of another employer. Held, that :"
. >:r~ r

though Ul€ Court cannot co mpel the defendant to specifically perform his \ ....i· ~
c~~tra(:t of ' person~1 service still the .plalntiffs could obtain an Injunction . ~
., 'r":\l
rutrafnlng the defendant from sen,ln'g elsewhere. , ", _ .~
'\ ~' . ' C;';riesw~rih v. MacDonald, (1898; 23 Born. 103,-A agreed on certain 'i : ~. ~ •

a
"i~ms 'toJ?eco~e assistant for 3 years to B who was physician practi~lng i
·In .z.anzlbar. At. the end of the first year A cUlsed to act as B 's a3slstant " - ~
;':f
and b-..~a·n ·_ to p'ractlse 10. Zanzibar. B sued A for an injunction under . this f, 'I! ,_
Act. Heltf. that B was entitled to an J.\junction restraIning A ' from practising ~' < AI
o~ hi; ac\ount In Zan'zibar for 3 years. . ,,,/-J

2J1~~ - ~~ l.{s . ~~ . ~~>~

~~~~""l1~~~'~'-'~
. , rJ ----~-~."~k~, . c,,c~ ~:~';";~ '.~. ' .~

VJ. Ct / , .... ' ...

.;...o~ - ~ ( ~~ IS I~ r':J)-
I ~NVC<-cX _ be-v.. (/,.1 l~ Bw, r ,(.
r '
~~
I/V"'0<-

LAi £vd
-t ~~
, ~.)c
(f'U-C# . 'C . ~
<...>"-

~~ jJ f uvWA
C
0 1/f.J
~t/J:P ~7

r ~ '.
/

--.'= /
I •

/ d . ~
/-'- .-
( /.1'.-'
 --,'r ... ".
<. > ", ~
,

" ,,'
PERPETUAL ' INJuNCTIONS 87 ;,
,
' i •.
.:-..:. ".. :: Contract Invohli ng per$!Jn~1 ,: ·~~.fv~ck~~:cannot ,be enr~r~~.d "· Th~I ' If .-1
'contracts to ' render pers'o nal ,servic6id6<B, '8. cannot enforce $peClCic p"e:rformance
.' the contract. ' The ~easons. ;,fof .::~~f · directi~g ~nfprcemen~ of contracts
'i?:';' i"v(,lv1lr,'g pe:.!o.n~.r se~\,jc~;'~~~;~~~~i:'< .~ .'. . '., ~~_
(1) the hnposslbllity of continUal supervision by , the Court; '.
(2) t~e In~ldlou;n~'s5 of ke~~i~fi' p~rson's tied to each other in business '/
relations when the tie has -b.efo me odious .. and . :..1
(3) the u~de;lrabIWy of t~r;;lng a contra,t bf service .Into a stalus of
~
servitude. Bu't where a contract for personal ~ervice contains both
afflrmaUv~ and negative stipulations, n~gativ~ specific performance
., .i-
.. (~
ff
I~ all.o wed . .Thus, W had agreed with L, that site would sing · at his r
theatre (Juring a ' certain period, and would. not. sing lIInywhere else
'" . without his wrltten~ permission. ' She made another engagement with
G and '~bandoned her previo~s engagement with L. L sought an "

.. --:.;.,,:.
,0.,.' ;
,,
injunction to restrain her from singing for G. The Court granted .~: ~.,:,;.
the Injunction as the positive ~nd negative stipulations together ."
formed one contract, and . the ,Court wO\Jld Interfere to prevent the
;"iolatlo~' of the :negative stipulation, although It co~ld not enforce ,I
specifiC performa.nce of the entire . contract: Lumly v. W4gner,
S.bb. N.idu v. Hap Badsha, (1907) 26 ·Mad . 168.-'A a'gre. d to sell to
B . all the mica produced fr vm A's mine and not to sell It to lIIny other
purcHas.er, ~ere though the Court cannot compel A to sell'all his mica to
B (for co~p~p~atlcin to B wo~ld be lid equate reHeO. It may restrain A by
,.
' . c- '
an ,I~Jlmctlon ·from seiling lhe mica · to. any person.

.. \, Bum & Co. v. MacDonald, (1909) 36 Cal. 3S4.-The defendant covenan!ed

~.' u·ri.der 'an agr~~ment "diligently and to the best of his ability to devote
himself to the dUties of a ~taftsman :ond general as,s lstant" to the plaintiff
for five years . The defendant' h~ving left th p. plaintiff company, the company
,......
, \1 sued ~ tne ' defendant'· under thls~ sect'ion. Held that ' the. agreement implieCf
f !oj. .t hat he would root gi~e hl~
.servi.c e.s durir:.g t~a,t p~riod
.to any ...other person,
" ;.~ .~r \ ~ r )a,~d : I~ suc~ ~ -case, an .lnJuncllon" (under S . 42) Is not only the eHect!ve
" but the only remedy left to the pl.lntiff company. '
f . ,
,~'. l, .. 43. , Amendment of Act 10 of 1940,-In Section 32 of 'the
'~1 Ar~itratlonAct, 1940, after the w~rd; "nor shall any arbit ration ,

r·'-'
, ' '\ agreement 'or award be", the word "enforced" shall be inserted,
' 44. Re;eal-The SpecifiC Relief Act, 1877, is hereby repealed .
- .. 1
•..•.1)

',6J~~ ' 1::-~-~~ ' ~

' ;-\
, 1
I
', ~ .' ~ GO ~ ~ ~r ~~-CfL~ .' ~d
: ~p , ;' ::.
.. JI
- ., .-- T.
" ~"

.,1
.,,
';1,,:
.'
r'
r-__________~~~----~--------~j

~' , " :.. _.__- ,- i~'

~~~. -'-, \
 - R

- --:--- -.---- ~~ - -

..
-

" ~' ~"

-,
.~ .. . r' I

.-
. - --". -:-