Dismissed

Abdul Rasheed v. Gowriamma Sankariamma

Kerala HC10 Sept 2021RFA/461/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Special First Appeal dismissing the appellant's petition for specific performance of a sale agreement. The High Court upheld the trial court's finding that the appellant failed to prove readiness and willingness under Section 16 of the Specific Relief Act and discretion under Section 20 was exercised against granting specific performance.

What did the court decide?

Specific performance sought by the appellant was dismissed. No costs awarded.

Abdul Rasheed Vs Gowriamma Sankariamma — Specific Performance | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 10^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 19TH BHADRA, 1943

¶5

RFA NO. 461 OF 2016

¶6

AGAINST THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT DATED 22/12/2015 IN OS 70/2010 OF

¶7

SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA

¶8

APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:

¶9

ABDUL RASHEED, S/O. HASSAN KUNJU, MALIKAYIL VEEDU, CHERAVALLY MURI, KAYAMKULAM VILLAGE.

¶10

BY ADVS.

¶11

SRI.K.K.SATHISH SRI.THOMSON T.KURICHIYANI

¶12

RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:

¶13

1 GOWRIAMMA SANKARIAMMA, D/O. GOWRIAMMA, RAJESH BHAVANAM, PALLICKAL NADUVILE MURI, BHARANICKAVU VILLAGE, MAVELIKARA TALUK FROM RAJESH BHAVANAM, PERINGALA MURI, KAYAMKULAM VILLAGE.

¶14

2 SANKARIAMMA BIJI, D/O. SANKARIAMMA, RAJESH BHAVANAM, PALLICKAL NADUVILE MURI, BHARANICKAVU VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK.

¶15

3 RAJESH KUMAR, S/O. SANKARIAMMA, RAJESH BHAVANAM, PALLICKAL NADUVILE MURI, BHARANICKAVU VILLAGE,MAVELIKKARA TALUK.

¶16

4 MAHESWARAN PILLAI, S/O. CHELLAPPAN PILLAI, RADHA BHAVANAM, PERINGALA MURI, KRISHNAPURAM.

¶17

5 RADHAMMA, W/O. MAHESWARAN PILLAI, RADHA BHAVANAM, PERINGALA MURI, KRISHNAPURAM.

¶18

6 MOHANKUMAR, S/O. KRISHNAN NAIR, MOODAMPATTIL HOUSE, PATHIYOOR PADINJARE MURI, KEERIKKAD VILLAGE.

¶19

7 SUDHAMANY,W/O. MOHANKUMAR, MOODAMPATTIL HOUSE, PATHIYOOR, PADINJARE MURI, KEERIKKAD VILLAGE.

¶20

BY ADV.SRI.K.K.SETHUKUMAR-R1 TO R3 R4 TO R7 BY ADVS.SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.MANU V.

¶21

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ORDERS ON 10.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

RFA NO. 461 OF 2016 2

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

Aggrieved by the rejection of relief of specific

¶25

performance and grant of return of advance amount with interest, the plaintiff came up.

¶26

The total sale consideration comes to Rs.6,25,000/- out of which an amount of Rs.2,00,000/-

¶27

was paid in advance. The agreed period of agreement was seven months from the date of execution of

¶28

contract, ie., 29/06/2009. The demand notice was issued on 28/1/2010 before the expiry of the agreement and the proposed purchaser visited the Sub Registrar

¶29

Office and stood as a witness to one of the transactions took place therein, so as to show and

¶30

establish his readiness and willingness. But, the trial court found that the plaintiff was not at all ready and willing to purchase the property since there

¶31

is failure to prove the balance consideration, if any,

¶32

ready with the appellant/plaintiff or whether he is

¶33

able to raise such a huge fund within the period of contract. Regarding the readiness and willingness as

¶34

RFA NO. 461 OF 2016 3

¶35

incorporated under Section 16 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the failure to adduce evidence, would go against the plaintiff. Further, the embargo incorporated under Section 20 of the Act that the discretion has to be exercised not to decree of specific performance even though it is lawful to do so, would operate against the plaintiff especially when he is not in a position to establish the mandate under Section 16 of the Act.

¶36

Hence, appeal fails, dismissed. No costs.

¶37

Sd/-

¶38

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE

¶39

msp

Abdul Rasheed v. Gowriamma Sankariamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Rasheed v. Gowriamma Sankariamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sreenivasan Nair Vs Salooja T.

Jose K. Varghese Vs K.K.Mathew

Salooja.T. Vs Sreenivasan Nair

B.P.Sherfudheen Vs Venugopalan and Others

C.v.Pavithran Vs C.v.Premakumari

Shriram General Insurance Vs Praveen E.C.