SYED DASTAGIR versus T.R. GOPALAKRISHNA SETTY

SYED DASTAGIR versus T.R. GOPALAKRISHNA SETTY

A pleading need not reproduce the statutory language of 'ready and willing to perform'; it suffices if, on a holistic reading, it demonstrates the plaintiff's readiness and willingness. The deposit of balance sale amount in court, even without court order, manifests willingness and cannot be held adversely; strict adherence to statutory words is unnecessary where substance is fulfilled.

Parties
Appellant Plaintiff: Syed Dastagir; Respondent Defendant: T.R. Gopalkrishna Setty
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 August 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; decree for specific performance restored.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Readiness and Willingness, Pleadings
Contract Law Specific Relief Specific Performance Readiness and Willingness Pleadings

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Syed Dastagir

Appellant Plaintiff

T.R. Gopalkrishna Setty

Respondent Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff's pleadings satisfied the requirement of averring readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
  2. 2 Whether deposit of balance sale consideration in court without court's order constitutes readiness and willingness
  3. 3 Whether non-use of exact statutory words defeats a claim for specific performance

Ratio Decidendi

A pleading need not reproduce the statutory language of 'ready and willing to perform'; it suffices if, on a holistic reading, it demonstrates the plaintiff's readiness and willingness. The deposit of balance sale amount in court, even without court order, manifests willingness and cannot be held adversely; strict adherence to statutory words is unnecessary where substance is fulfilled.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; decree for specific performance restored.

Orders

  • Order of Karnataka High Court dated 22.10.1986 set aside
  • Decree in favour of the plaintiff as passed by the trial court and appellate court restored