RUSSI FISHERIES P. LTD. & ANR. versus BHAVNA SETH & ORS.

RUSSI FISHERIES P. LTD. & ANR. versus BHAVNA SETH & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the first appellate court's findings on extension of time, payment of cash consideration and plaintiff's readiness and willingness were findings of fact not shown to be perverse and thus not open to reappraisal in second appeal; the adverse presumption from plaintiff's non-appearance was rebutted by cogent evidence (notably PW-4 and documents including the Sub-Registrar application and receipts); transfers by defendants during pendency are subject to lis pendens (Section 52 TP Act) and are non est; there was no evidence of price escalation or other change making specific performance inequitable; accordingly the decree of specific performance as passed by the...

Parties
Appellant(s)/defendant(s): Russi Fisheries P. Ltd. & Anr.; Respondent(s)/plaintiff(s): Bhavna Seth & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (civil Appeal No. 109 of 2010) / Appeal to the Supreme Court From the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in RSA No. 3880 of 2003; Special Leave Petition Granted and Interim Order; Final Hearing and Judgment by Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Decree of the Specific Performance, Agreement to Sell, Continuous Readiness and Willingness to Perform, Refund of Sale Consideration, Execution of Sale Deed, Substantial Question of Law, Extension of Time, Payment of Cash Money, Adverse Presumption for Non Appearance, Rebuttal Presumption, Doctrine of Lis Pendens, Equitable/discretionary Relief
Specific Performance Transfer of Property Act, 1882 Second Appeal (section 100 Cpc) Doctrine of Lis Pendens Decree of the Specific Performance Agreement to Sell Continuous Readiness and Willingness to Perform Refund of Sale Consideration +7 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Russi Fisheries P. Ltd. & Anr.

Appellant(s)/defendant(s)

Bhavna Seth & Ors.

Respondent(s)/plaintiff(s)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (civil Appeal No. 109 of 2010) / Appeal to the Supreme Court From the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in RSA No. 3880 of 2003; Special Leave Petition Granted and Interim Order; Final Hearing and Judgment by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court was correct in upholding the first appellate court's decree of specific performance in second appeal
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff proved continuous readiness and willingness to perform the agreement to sell
  3. 3 Whether cash payments alleged to have been made were proved and whether recipient had authority to receive for the company

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that the first appellate court's findings on extension of time, payment of cash consideration and plaintiff's readiness and willingness were findings of fact not shown to be perverse and thus not open to reappraisal in second appeal; the adverse presumption from plaintiff's non-appearance was rebutted by cogent evidence (notably PW-4 and documents including the Sub-Registrar application and receipts); transfers by defendants during pendency are subject to lis pendens (Section 52 TP Act) and are non est; there was no evidence of price escalation or other change making specific performance inequitable; accordingly the decree of specific performance as passed by the...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Decree of specific performance as passed by the First Appellate Court is maintained.