SUSHIL KUMAR AGARWAL versus MEENAKSHI SADHU & ORS.

SUSHIL KUMAR AGARWAL versus MEENAKSHI SADHU & ORS.

Specific performance of the development agreement cannot be granted since the agreement fails to satisfy the requirements of Section 14(3)(c)(i) (contract scope not sufficiently defined) and Section 14(3)(c)(ii) (adequate monetary compensation possible); Section 14(3)(c)(iii) does not bar the developer's suit but is not decisive here.

Parties
Appellant: Sushil Kumar Agarwal; Respondents: Meenakshi Sadhu & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appellate Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Specific Performance of Development Agreement, Interpretation of Specific Relief Act S.14(3)(c), Purposive Statutory Interpretation
Contract Law Specific Relief Specific Performance of Development Agreement Interpretation of Specific Relief Act S.14(3)(c) Purposive Statutory Interpretation

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sushil Kumar Agarwal

Appellant

Meenakshi Sadhu & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Appellate Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Section 14(3)(c)(iii) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 bars a suit by a developer for specific performance of a development agreement against the owner
  2. 2 Whether the development agreement between the appellant and respondent is capable of specific performance under Section 14(3)(c)

Ratio Decidendi

Specific performance of the development agreement cannot be granted since the agreement fails to satisfy the requirements of Section 14(3)(c)(i) (contract scope not sufficiently defined) and Section 14(3)(c)(ii) (adequate monetary compensation possible); Section 14(3)(c)(iii) does not bar the developer's suit but is not decisive here.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal stands dismissed; no order as to costs.