Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Suit Barred by Limitation - Begin When Acknowledgment of refusal by the party seeking specific performance – Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal verdict, the Supreme Court of India has ruled on a contentious land sale dispute, declaring that the suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell is barred by limitation. The judgment, delivered by a bench of the highest court, has far-reaching implications for similar cases across the country.

The dispute revolved around an agreement to sell land, and the key issue at hand was the limitation period for filing a suit for specific performance. The court examined various aspects of the case, including the interpretation of agreement terms, the conduct of the parties involved, and the crucial date for the commencement of the limitation period.

The judgment stated, "Whether suit barred by limitation – Applicability of Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963 – Date of commencement of limitation period – Notice of refusal – Acknowledgment of refusal by the party seeking specific performance – Interpretation of agreement terms – Parties' conduct – Refusal to perform the agreement – Suit filed beyond the prescribed limitation period – Suit for specific performance barred by limitation."

Additionally, the court addressed the issue of refund of the advance payment made by the plaintiff. The plaintiff had paid Rs. 1,00,000/- as an advance in the land sale agreement. However, given the court's ruling on the limitation period, the plaintiff sought a refund of the advance.

The judgment further noted, "Refund of advance sought – Payment of Rs. 1,00,000/- as advance – Expenses incurred by the plaintiff in obtaining layout plan approval – Decree for refund of Rs. 1,00,000/- with interest not justified – Exercise of power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India – Award of Rs. 50,00,000/- to the plaintiff – Direction to pay within six months – Liability to pay interest at 8% per annum on the awarded amount in case of non-payment within the stipulated time frame."

The decision, while clarifying the legal position on suits for specific performance, also emphasizes the importance of adhering to the prescribed limitation period in such cases. Furthermore, it highlights the court's commitment to ensuring justice by awarding a substantial amount to the plaintiff as compensation for the failed land sale agreement.

Date of Decision: September 5, 2023

VALLIAMMAI vs K.P. MURALI AND OTHERS      

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/12-Sep-2023_A.-VALLIAMMAI_Vs_K.P._Murali.pdf"]

Latest Legal News