R. SHAMA NAIK versus G. SRINIVASIAH

R. SHAMA NAIK versus G. SRINIVASIAH

The High Court, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, found that the plaintiff failed to establish that he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract; this finding of fact was not perverse and there was no reason for the Supreme Court to interfere, hence the SLP was dismissed.

Parties
Petitioner (original Plaintiff): R. Shama Naik; Respondent (original Defendant): G. Srinivasiah
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) No. 13933 of 2021 / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court of Karnataka Judgment Dated 01.07.2021 in RFA No. 1017 of 2013; SLP Dismissed by Supreme Court
Outcome
Petition dismissed; Supreme Court refused to interfere with the High Court judgment allowing the defendant's appeal.
Legal Topics
Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act, Readiness and Willingness to Perform Contract, Availability of Funds, Oral and Documentary Evidence
Specific Relief Act, 1963 Contract Section 16(c) Specific Relief Act Readiness and Willingness to Perform Contract Availability of Funds Oral and Documentary Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

R. Shama Naik

Petitioner (original Plaintiff)

G. Srinivasiah

Respondent (original Defendant)

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (civil) No. 13933 of 2021 / Appeal to Supreme Court Against High Court of Karnataka Judgment Dated 01.07.2021 in RFA No. 1017 of 2013; SLP Dismissed by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff proved that he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract as required by Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
  2. 2 Whether the High Court's finding that the plaintiff failed to establish readiness and willingness was perverse

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence, found that the plaintiff failed to establish that he was always ready and willing to perform his part of the contract; this finding of fact was not perverse and there was no reason for the Supreme Court to interfere, hence the SLP was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed; Supreme Court refused to interfere with the High Court judgment allowing the defendant's appeal.

Orders

  • Petition dismissed
  • Impugned judgment of the High Court dated 01.07.2021 upheld