PREM RAJ versus D.L.F. HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. & ANR.

PREM RAJ versus D.L.F. HOUSING & CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD. & ANR.

A plaintiff who sues for rescission of a contract (seeking a declaration the contract is void) owing to fraud or undue influence cannot, in the alternative, sue for specific performance of that contract. The Specific Relief Act deliberately omits any such provision. Additionally, absence of an averment of readiness and willingness to perform bars maintainability of a suit for specific performance. Therefore, specific performance cannot be claimed in the alternative in such circumstances.

Parties
Appellant: Prem Raj; Respondent No. 1: D.L.F. Housing & Construction Pvt. Ltd.; Respondent No. 2: Shri Moti Ram Bhalla
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 April 1968
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated February 14, 1964 of the Punjab High Court, Circuit Bench at Delhi in Civil Revision No. 228 D of 1962
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Legal Topics
Specific Performance, Rescission of Contract, Alternative Reliefs, Jurisdiction Under Revision
Civil Procedure Contract Law Specific Performance Rescission of Contract Alternative Reliefs Jurisdiction Under Revision

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Prem Raj

Appellant

D.L.F. Housing & Construction Pvt. Ltd.

Respondent No. 1

Shri Moti Ram Bhalla

Respondent No. 2

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Judgment and Order Dated February 14, 1964 of the Punjab High Court, Circuit Bench at Delhi in Civil Revision No. 228 D of 1962

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a plaintiff suing for rescission (declaration that a contract is void/inoperative) by reason of undue influence can, in the same suit, pray in the alternative for specific performance of the same contract.
  2. 2 Whether in the absence of an averment that the plaintiff is ready and willing to perform his part of the contract, a relief for specific performance can be maintained.

Ratio Decidendi

A plaintiff who sues for rescission of a contract (seeking a declaration the contract is void) owing to fraud or undue influence cannot, in the alternative, sue for specific performance of that contract. The Specific Relief Act deliberately omits any such provision. Additionally, absence of an averment of readiness and willingness to perform bars maintainability of a suit for specific performance. Therefore, specific performance cannot be claimed in the alternative in such circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • High Court's order upheld; the suit, as far as the relief for specific performance, must fail.