Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Supreme Court Rules Right to Repurchase in Conditional Sale Deed Can Be Assigned, Validates Assignment in Gift Deed

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has clarified the legal position regarding the assignment of the right to repurchase in both conditional sale deeds and gift deeds. The verdict, delivered by Justice Rajesh Bindal, sheds light on the assignability and enforceability of such rights, along with addressing related contractual issues.

The case of Indira Devi v. Veena Gupta & Ors. came before the apex court, the bench considered the provisions of Section 15(b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, along with the relevant clauses and intent of the documents involved.

The headnotes of the judgment encapsulate the key rulings and principles laid down by the court:

  1. Conditional Sale Deed - Assignment of Right to Repurchase:

The court examined whether the right to repurchase contained in a sale deed can be assigned by the vendor or if it is of a personal nature and cannot be transferred. It was held that unless explicitly stated in the document, the right to repurchase is not personal and can be assigned. The court emphasized that no implied prohibition against assignment or transfer should be inferred, and assignment of obligations would require the consent of the other party. (Para 15, 16)

  1. Gift Deed - Validity of Assignment:

The court deliberated on the validity of the assignment of the right to repurchase in a gift deed, particularly when consideration money is involved. It ruled that the transfer of the right to repurchase can be considered an assignment and need not be categorized as a gift solely due to the involvement of consideration money. The executor's intent and the conditions attached to the assignment were deemed crucial in determining its validity. (Para 23)

  1. Enforceability of Contract - Specific Performance - Multiple Reliefs:

The court addressed the issue of multiple reliefs claimed in a suit, including specific performance and tenancy claims. It held that multiple reliefs can be claimed in a suit, but the nature of the claims and their compatibility must be considered. (Para 14)

  1. Assignability of Contractual Rights:

The court examined the assignability of contractual rights and distinguished between the assignment of rights and obligations. It stated that contractual rights are generally assignable unless the contract is personal in nature or the rights are incapable of assignment under the law or an agreement between the parties. Assignment of obligations requires the consent of the other party. (Para 20)

  1. Construction of Documents - Implied Terms:

The court discussed the construction of documents and the implication of a prohibition against assignment or transfer. It emphasized that unless the contents of the document and evidence clearly indicate a prohibition, no implied prohibition against assignment or transfer should be inferred. Section 15(b) of the Specific Relief Act allows for the assignment of benefits unless the contract is personal in nature. (Para 17)

The judgment also referred to several relevant cases, including Bhoju Mandal and Ors. v. Debnath Bhagat and Ors., Kapilaben and Ors. v. Ashok Kumar Jayantilal Sheth, through POA Gopal Bhai Madhusudan Patel and Ors., and T.M. Balakrishna Mudaliar v. M. Satyanarayana Rao. These cases aided in the interpretation of the law and supported the court's findings. (Para 19, 20, 21)

This landmark judgment brings clarity to the legal landscape concerning the assignment of the right to repurchase in conditional sale deeds and gift deeds. It affirms that unless expressly

 prohibited, such rights are assignable and enforceable. This ruling will have far-reaching implications on property transactions and related contracts, providing parties with greater flexibility and legal certainty.

Date of Decision: 04 July 2023

Indira Devi   vs Veena Gupta & Ors.       

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/04-Jul-2023-Indira-Devi-VS-VEENA-GUPTA.pdf"]

 

Latest Legal News