SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE: Long Efflux of Time

The discretion to direct specific performance of an agreement and that too after elapse of a long period of time, undoubtedly, has to be exercised on sound, reasonable, rational and acceptable principles. The ultimate guiding test would be the principles of fairness and reasonableness as may be dictated by the peculiar facts of a given case. It must however be emphasized that efflux of time and escalation of price of property, by itself, cannot be a valid ground to deny the relief of specific performance. The aforesaid two features, at best, may justify award of additional compensation to the vendor by grant of a price higher than what had been stipulated in the agreement which price, in a given case, may even be the market price as on the date of the order of the final court.

In the instant case, the owners of the suit property after inducting plaintiff as a tenant in respect of half portion of the suit property executed an agreement dated 22-12-1970 to sell the suit property in favour of the plaintiff. As the plaintiff purchaser had not received any intimation from the owner of the property in the matter of execution of the sale deed, the plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance on 3-11-1997 i.e. much beyond the stipulated period of three years from the accrual of the cause of action. However, the Supreme Court held that the ends of justice would require this court to decree the suit of the plaintiffs for specific performance of the agreement but it was stipulated that the sale deed that will now have to be executed by the owner in favour of the plaintiffs will be for the market price of the suit property as on the date of the present order.

Satya Jain (D) Through LRs. v. Anis Ahmed Rushdie (D) Thr. LRs, C.A. No. 2 of 2012;
Decided on 3-12-2012 (SC) [ P. Sathasivam and Ranjan Gogoi, JJ.]

Print Page