DR. MANOHAR GANAPATHI RAVANKAR versus GURUNANDA RAIKAR

DR. MANOHAR GANAPATHI RAVANKAR versus GURUNANDA RAIKAR

Plaintiff failed to establish readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract and no credible evidence was produced regarding payment of Rs.6,75,000/-. High Court erred in granting decree for recovery of Rs.7,01,000/- based on presumptions. Plaintiff is not entitled to specific performance; only refund of Rs.26,000/- with interest is awarded.

Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Dr. Manohar Ganapathi Ravankar; Respondent/defendant: Gurunanda Raikar
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
15 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal No. 3415 and 3416 of 2019 / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 17.02.2016 of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in R.f.a. No. 188 of 2013
Outcome
Appeal filed by plaintiff dismissed; appeal by defendant allowed.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Sale Agreement, Readiness and Willingness, Refund of Earnest Money
Contract Law Specific Performance Sale Agreement Readiness and Willingness Refund of Earnest Money

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr. Manohar Ganapathi Ravankar

Appellant/plaintiff

Gurunanda Raikar

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal No. 3415 and 3416 of 2019 / Appeal From Judgment and Order Dated 17.02.2016 of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in R.f.a. No. 188 of 2013

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the contract for specific performance?
  2. 2 Whether the plaintiff paid a further sum of Rs.6,75,000/- to the defendant as part of sale consideration?
  3. 3 Whether the High Court erred in granting a decree for payment of Rs.7,01,000/- to the plaintiff?

Ratio Decidendi

Plaintiff failed to establish readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract and no credible evidence was produced regarding payment of Rs.6,75,000/-. High Court erred in granting decree for recovery of Rs.7,01,000/- based on presumptions. Plaintiff is not entitled to specific performance; only refund of Rs.26,000/- with interest is awarded.

Court Disposition

Appeal filed by plaintiff dismissed; appeal by defendant allowed.

Orders

  • Defendant ordered to pay Rs.26,000/- to plaintiff along with simple interest at the rate of 9% per annum from date of payment till date of realisation.
  • Appeals disposed of accordingly.