PRAKASH CHANDRA versus NARAYAN

PRAKASH CHANDRA versus NARAYAN

Hardship defence under Section 20(2)(b) of the Specific Relief Act must be pleaded and supported by evidence. In this case, since the respondent did not plead nor bring evidence of hardship, the trial court's decree for specific performance stands. The first appellate court and High Court erred in setting aside the decree without such an issue or evidence.

Parties
Appellant: Prakash Chandra; Respondent: Narayan
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
23 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Appeal/decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; decree for specific performance affirmed.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance of Contract, Hardship Defense Under Specific Relief Act

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prakash Chandra

Appellant

Narayan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Appeal/decision

  1. 1 Whether the grant of specific performance would cause hardship to the respondent under Section 20(2)(b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
  2. 2 Whether the appellate court and High Court erred in reversing the trial court's decree for specific performance without an issue framed or evidence regarding hardship.

Ratio Decidendi

Hardship defence under Section 20(2)(b) of the Specific Relief Act must be pleaded and supported by evidence. In this case, since the respondent did not plead nor bring evidence of hardship, the trial court's decree for specific performance stands. The first appellate court and High Court erred in setting aside the decree without such an issue or evidence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; decree for specific performance affirmed.

Orders

  • Order passed by the High Court and the first appellate court set aside.
  • Judgment and decree of the trial court affirmed.