They say all good things always do not come on time. Sometimes it is delayed because all fruits are ripened up. And so is the today's resource present today. Because we all know that release which can be granted by the court in a suit by a specific performance is always an issue. There is one thing about that you can simply you can get anything which you are actually demanding within your mind that you will get it. But is it actually so that or the relief has to be claimed in a specific mode and a manner. And where there are larger issues as a professional one feels, where in sometimes the court says that relief you have claimed cannot be given because it's not happily worded, or it has not even been worded. And sometimes specifically in 226 and 482 under the inherent pass you get when we write any other order or direction, any relief. But does that power though not specifically unfurred or you can as such agree upon that it lies within that. But if they actually court sees from the pleading in terms of order seven etc. What is the way forward for that. For all these issues for a youngster or for any lawyer practicing on the civil side, or any professional for that matter. I would say this webinar would always help him to understand the issues in the right perspective. And because since we have been doing webinars pan India and speakers are also coming from pan India. And a lot of webinars we have done with the person in charge that is Arilakshmi Logomouti of legal elites legal elites. And just like just like the title of the group Eagles she has an eye to catch up good resource persons for that matter we thought that we should have the session from a resource person who is immensely popular down south. And as they say that what boundaries are only in the mindset and these virtual quotes have actually shown and reflected to us that boundary knowledge has no boundaries just like smile can win the hearts of many similar is the way of knowledge. Knowledge also not only wins the heart but it also means the mind that is the only beauty within the smile and the knowledges that it wins heart and brain. Whereas smile can generally win only the heart because they say that heart is on the left, but it thinks it right. And before we ask Mr. Shankar Murali to take forward the session, the our knowledge partner Arilakshmi, the actual eagle of that group to take over I would rather say she is the eagle who can actually see from the top, what is the going best over all over pan India. Over to you Arilakshmi. Welcome my dear brother Vikas. Thank you so much for inviting legally gives a light team to co partner. Restricted Shankar Murali sir is basically from Pruthi, a very famous town down south in Tamil Nadu and he's such a renowned person in the civil jurisprudence he has been practicing more than three decades, and he spends lots of time in his library is enough of the word enough for this midnight oil. And in fact, sir takes session without taking a single penny from for everyone, wherever he goes, whichever forum whichever college or whichever association whichever bar, they, he goes and serve as a habit not to take any money which is given whatever if it has a little amount if at all is given he spends only for the people who is asking them to give it for some organization that is magnanimous mindset and he has such a voluminous citations with him whenever he comes on at he comes in such a load of citations and we should thank his junior Haritha or just finished his law she has been immensely helping us in this webinar. Thank you to so nice to join in with the beyond law CLC, we can even select as a family is conducting. I welcome because and all the participants serve Shankar Murali sir it's a great honor. Into Chennai. Now we are going to North and this is the first step we are going to pan India so we are happy from Tamil Nadu everyone thank you all from pan India for joining in this session I welcome everyone of you. Yes, just please the camera properly so that you are in the center of the frame and then we start. Yeah, it's fine sir. It's fine. Yeah, don't come close otherwise you come closer to the screen just push back fine. That's fine. May I proceed? Sir still you have come closer to the camera. Yes, yes. Back, back. Yeah, thank you. Thank you, my dear brother because G and my dear sister, it is my immense pleasure to deliver lecture on this topic again, and that that is first time in North India suit for specific performance through webinar. I have been taking webinar classes in Tamil Nadu only when my brother because he invited me, I immediately accepted his offer wholeheartedly and sincerely. And I would be firing in my duty if I am not thanking Advocate Adilakshmi who has introduced my name to Mr. Vikas G. I accept the differences between the court fees and all other things are same. And yeah, we're all well aware a degree passed by a trial court on marriage can only be set aside or reversed by the appellate court. But under section 28 of this specifically fact, a degree for specific performance passed by the court of first instance, that is a trial court on marriage. It can also be set aside by the same court which has passed the degree when the plaintiff degree holder fails to deposit the balance sale price within the time allowed in the degree. Like this, there are so many wonders under this specifically fact and let me deal with it. I have divided this topic into 12 chapters and the first chapter number one is concept. The specific in 63 is evolved from the well known legal maximum to be just a remedy that is remedy for every right infringed. Hence this act contemplates an adequate remedy for the right infringed. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfillment of an obligation. Please kindly take note on 2007 SCC 125, 2007 SCC page 125. Specifically fact is an adjective law because the name itself indicates it's a specific relief and it is a part of law procedure. It is not a substantive law. It is a part of law procedure and it is a branch of a stopper. Granting a degree for specific performance is a rule. Acception, refusal is the exception. And chapter number two, constitutional validity. You are aware under article 300A of the constitution of India, no person shall be deprived of this property saved by authority of law. This is my property. Can the agree holder, agreement holder can file a suit and take away my property against my wishes. It is not violating article 300A of the constitution of India because this is because the agreement is for the fulfillment of contractual obligation. But it has no impact over the right of a transfer to enforce a contract of transfer. 1992 to civil law judgment, 1992 to civil law judgment 105 Delhi, Delhi High Court. Now third chapter, forms of pleadings. All the civil advocates are aware that each and every suit in the plaint in each and every suit must contain the legal governments which are set out in Appendix A. There are so many forms. When we refer the Appendix A in a suit for money, citations 1992 to civil law judgment page 105. Mr. Shankar, you can keep on continuing this citation. Your associate can give it on the WhatsApp later on. Yes, yes. Or if your associate can type it, then it's fine. But otherwise you can share the total compensation. I will share it. So each and every in the plaint in each and every suit must contain the legal governments as contemplated under Appendix A. For example, if you find a suit for recovery of money based on a promissory note, what would be the legal governments that the defendant executed a promissory note after borrowing somehow rupees one lakh as the case may be. And he has executed a promissory note in my favor. He has unconditionally undertaken to repay the amount both the principal and interest on demand. My audio clearance would have been one number. So the definition of promissory note under the Negotiable Instrument Act, the person who has borrowed money unconditionally undertakes to repay the principal amount along with the interest on demand. Suppose a suit has been filed without issuing any pre-suit notice demanding the defendant that he have already executed a promissory note in favor of my claim and he failed to not care to pay the principal and interest. If any suit is filed based on the promissory note without giving any notice, can the defendant plead that the suit is premature because there is no demand. But form A, Appendix A, form one says, in a, in a client in the suit for money based on the promissory note, it need not contains the overman that the defendant unconditionally undertakes to repay the amount on demand because the filing of the plaint itself is a demand. Likewise, when we see the legal governments that may be stated in a, in the client in a suit for specific performance that is in form 47. Form 47 in Appendix A says, the client in a suit for specific performance must contain the legal governments, legal governments. That is, the plaintiff has been or still always ready and willing to perform his part of obligation. So in a suit for specific performance, when delivery of possession is sought for, the plaint must contain the legal governments that the plaintiff has been or always ready and willing to perform his part of contract. So it is in form 47 of Appendix A. When a suit is filed for specific performance stating that in furtherance of the sale agreement, the plaintiff is inducted into possession of the property and the suit is filed for specific performance and for permanent injunction. Restaining the defendant vendor for interfering with his principal possession and enjoyment of the suit property, then such a plaint must be in consonance with Appendix A form 48. Appendix A form 48. So each and every suit, in each and every suit, the plaint must disclose the legal overman has contemplated under Appendix A. Now the registration act has been amended. Section 17-1 capital A has been inserted with the effect from 24-9-2001. When the sale agreement contains a recital that the possession of the property to be conveyed is handed over, then such a sale agreement must be registered compulsorily. That is the mandate of the amended section 17-1A. So if a suit is filed for specific performance of the sale agreement, if it is unregistered containing the class that the possession of the property has already been delivered or delivered in furtherance of the sale agreement, then it must be registered. Now the point for the consideration. Advocate those who are all practicing civil side are often confused. Registration act says, sale agreement containing delivery of the possession of the property has to be registered compulsorily. If it is unregistered, then what is the legal effect? Can it be marked as an evidence? So while inserting section 17-1A suitably section 49 of the registration act and section 53A of the transfer of property act has also been amended. So they cannot ask for part performance when the sale agreement is unregistered. If a suit is filed on the basis of the sale agreement which is unregistered containing the delivery of possession and the degree for specific performance alone can be granted and the relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendant mentor for interfering with possession and enjoyment cannot be granted. This is the, for this I would like to rely upon 2012-03 CTC Madras page 205 division bench. Now in our state Tamil Nadu, the Tamil Nadu government has also amended the registration act and on and from 112 2012 all sale agreements have to be registered compulsorily. Registration is compulsory, compulsory whether or not delivery of the possession of the property is given or not. So after 112 2012 all sale agreements have to be registered compulsorily. I don't know whether in Punjab and Ghariyana similar amendment was made but unfortunately section 49 of the registration act has not been amended. Section 49 deals with effect of non-registration of document which requires compulsory registration. So after the advent of the Tamil Nadu amendment act all sale agreements have to be registered. If the sale agreement is not registered can it be received in evidence? Can it be received in evidence? That is the point. Since section 49 has not been amended. Section 49 of the registration act says in a suitable specific performance the sale agreement can be received in evidence. So even though stated that the sale agreement has to be registered compulsorily, in and by virtue of the non-amendment of section 49 an unregistered sale agreement can be admitted in evidence. A degree for specific performance can also be granted. This is 2008 one Tamil Nadu civil judgment page 771. In the recent judgment our Honorable Supreme Court in Prakashagu versus Salol and others. This is delivered on 2009 2019. The Honorable High Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the suit sale agreement is an unregistered one since it requires compulsory registration. Setting aside the Honorable High Court the Supreme Court said in so far as section 49 of the registration the unregistered sale agreement can be received in evidence. A degree for specific performance can be granted. Now suppose a sale deed was executed. It was duly executed, attested but it has not been registered. So based on the unregistered sale deed I am talking about sale deed not sale agreement. Unregistered sale deed whether it can be received in evidence, whether it can be looked into for what purpose. Unregistered sale deed can also be received in evidence. For the purpose of proving the collateral transaction that is the existence of the sale agreement between the parties. This is 2010 for MLJ 529 Supreme Court. This is the decision of our Supreme Court 2010 for MLJ page 529. And it has also been followed in our Tamil Nadu High Court in Madras High Court 2014 1 CTC 2014 1 CTC page 4 Part 7. So you please keep it in mind. The plaintiff in a suit for specific performance must be in consonance with the form A of degree for specific performance alone can be granted. The degree in a suit for specific performance 12 A. The degree must contain that the suit is decreed. The plaintiff is directly normally 2 months. The court will also add that defendant performance. But it assumes the character of a preliminary degree. Court within a stipulated time. Files should of course be the same. Then under section 28 of the specific relief act is a degree holder. Degree holder means law is something different. Granted in favor of A. So they can also execute a degree. And the degree is assigned. The assigning can also execute the degree. Degree in the person in whose favor the degree is passed. But once a degree for specific performance is granted. Who is the degree holder? We can immediately say that is the plaintiff. Certainly not. Both the plaintiff and the plaintiff deposits the balance and price into time. Then he can execute the degree. Out of those circumstances he is a degree holder. Suppose the defendant before the expired time the plaintiff may be directed to deposit the balance and price. Then under those circumstances the defendant can direct to the plaintiff to deposit the balance and price to be affixed. The court fee variable is on the total. The court fees in a suit for specific performance is 3% on the total sale price. Article 54 of the Limitation Act gives the answer. Article 50 provides the expiry of such a period from the date within a period of 3 years the suit has to be filed for specific performance. So first Lim says no date is fixed. Then how to reckon the period of the application commences. When the plaintiff notice has to issue statutory notice. Expressing his readiness and willingness to purchase. The defendant offers the receipt of this notice from the plaintiff. Refuses to execute. Refuses to execute sale date. Or deny the execution of the sale date and sale agreement whatever it may be. Then that he has noticed that the performance refused by his adversary. Then from the date 3 years period is contemplated under the second Lim POP article 54 of Limitation Act. Still Lim says 3 years period. Normally we will issue a notice within the stipulated time. Suppose the sale agreement contains that from the date of execution of the sale agreement the balance sale price has to be filed within a period. Whether such practice is correct. Your suit may be well within time. There is no doubt about it. Your suit will not be dismissed on the ground of limitation. But in a suit for specific performance. The plaintiff must be ready and willing to perform this part of obligation from the day one. That is from the date of execution of the sale agreement. If any delay is caused in filing the suit for specific performance then it affects your suit. Because delay defeats equity. Equity favors a vigilant and not an indolent litigant. Now as per the amended act there is no discretionary power vested within the court. Either to grant a degree for specific performance or not. But equity aids the vigilant and not the indolent. Immediately you must file a suit for specific performance without any delay. This has been held in Municipal Council Ahmed Nagar. Versus saw Hyderabad 2000 year 2000 volume 2 SCC page 48. So there cannot be any delay latches on the part of the plaintiff in bringing the suit for specific performance. And next and interesting chapter is readiness and willingness. What it means, what it refers. Just now I said as per appendix A form 47. The plaintiff in a super specific performance must be, must aware that he is, he has been or still ready and willing to perform this part of two phraseology readiness and willingness. Readiness means the capacity of the plaintiff to pay the balance sale price. That is the plaintiff must prove that he is having sufficient financial resources to pay the balance sale price. That is his readiness. Willingness, this phraseology is referable to the conduct of the plaintiff. Conduct in strict sense here means and blemish to conduct. What it means, the plaintiff conducts from the date of execution of the sale agreement. Whether he has performed his part of obligation in time. Whether he has filed a suit without any delay. Whether he is very much interested in buying the property. These things have to be considered by the court. So the willingness is a term referred to the conduct of the plaintiff. Before the amendment made in the specifically fact 2018, under section 16, the plaintiff who fails to, our is not entitled to get a certificate, a degree for specific performance. Proof is not necessary. But that has been amended. Section 16c, the word our is deleted. The word prove is inserted. Who fails to prove his readiness and willingness is not entitled to get a degree for specific performance. Because this is a personal bar to grant a degree for specific performance. This is a personal bar. The explanation to section 16c also. The person who failed to prove his readiness and willingness is not entitled to get a degree for specific performance. So to get a degree for specific performance, the plaintiff in an action must satisfy the court that he is always ready and willing. Terms readiness and willingness are having nexus with each other. It is inseparable. Proof of both would empower you to get a degree for specific performance. Proof of one is not sufficient. It will not entitle you to get a degree for specific performance. In other words, the readiness is nothing but a wagon containing gold coin. The wagon containing gold coin has to reach its destination. How? Only by cart. The cart is the willingness. Only by the cart, the wagon containing the gold coin can reach its destination. This has been held in 2016 for CTC page 470 Madras. 2016 for CTC page 470. Another important thing we have come across in so many cases. The sale agreement contains that the sale price fixed is one lakh. On the date of execution of the sale agreement, the purchaser has paid somehow rupees 90,000 towards advance. And he has agreed to pay the balance sale price of 10,000 within a period of one year or two years. If this kind of sale agreement is precedent to service in a suit of specific performance, without any hesitation, without any reservation, the court may come to a conclusion that the transaction that transpired between the plaintiff and defendant must be a loan transaction or not a sale transaction. Then the court can simply dismiss the suit for specific purpose. It can dismiss the suit. This is held in Papamal v. P. Ramasthami. 2012 for CTC page 100. Our apex court has elaborately discussed the terms readiness and willingness. The terms readiness and willingness. In the case reported in His Holiness Acharya Swami Ganesh versus Sita Ram Thapa. 1996 for ACC 526. 1996 for ACC page 526. When the plaintiff be able to establish that he is having sufficient funds to pay the balance sale price, but at the same time he has failed to prove his conduct. If the suit is filed with delay, if the suit is filed with latches and there are some inordinate delay and procrastination, unreasonable delay, the court will not grant a degree for specific performance. The plaintiff conduct is unblemished. He has issued notice in time, he has filed the suit in time, but he is not able to prove his financial resources. Then no degree can be granted. Now the amended act says you have to prove readiness and willingness. Then how to prove my readiness in a suit for specific performance? The plaintiff can file his income tax return, stating that he is paying income tax every year like this. And he can also file his back statement to show that he is having sufficient balance, he is going to pay the balance sale price. Or he may examine any one of his friends or relatives to prove that they are ready to help them financially, help the plaintiff financially to pay the balance sale price as and when request is made. So these are all some sort of evidences to prove the plaintiff's readiness. But the plaintiff's conduct can only be determined by his own act, that is proper notice within the time stipulated in the sale agreement under the filing of the suit, not in time, immediately when the plaintiff noticed that his performance is refixed. And only he is entitled to get a degree for specific performance. So when the plaintiff has not pleaded that he is ready and willing to perform this part of contract, no degree for specific performance can be granted. 2019, 3 CTC, page 564 Madras division bench. 2019, 3 CTC, page 564 Madras division bench. Then I will come to that later regarding the burden of proof. Suppose, before filing the suit for specific performance by the plaintiff, if the property agreed to be conveyed in favor of the plaintiff is sold by the vendor in favor of the third party, a subsequent purchaser, if the suit is made in action by the plaintiff for specific performance, if the vendor remained ex-party, then the subsequent purchaser can rise a plea that the plaintiff is not ready, that the plaintiff is not willing to perform this part of contract. So this is Supreme Court decision reported in AR 2009 Supreme Court page 2157. Page 2157. Then very important in the suit for specific performance. Whether the sale agreement can be assigned or transferred, whether the transferee or representative in interest or assigned of the agreement holder can maintain a suit for specific performance. Suppose, A enters into a sale agreement with B and he has paid some amount as advance and agreed to pay the balance sale price. Before the expiry of that period, he has transferred his right in favor of his friend C, can see straight away file a suit for specific performance against B, when there is no privity of contract between B and C initially, whether the sale agreement can be assigned. The answer lies under section 15B of the specific effect. Who may obtain a degree for specific performance? Party to the agreement or representative in interest or principal of either party. So a nominee or assigned can very well maintain a suit for specific performance against the vendor provided when the sale agreement specifically contains a recital, that the interest here in created cannot be transferred or assigned, then under those circumstances that sale agreement cannot be transferred or assigned. So in the absence of such recital in the sale agreement, the transferee or assigned can very well maintain a suit for specific performance. This is a very rare judgment. Please kindly take note of it. AR 2004, AR 2004, Supreme Court, Page 343, AR 2004, Supreme Court, Page 343. Normally what the civil advocates are doing is, for filing a suit for specific performance, it's a cumbersome process. Notices have to be sent, deadness and willingness have to be established and the court fees have to be paid. Instead of filing a suit for specific performance, straight away they will file a suit for injunction, restraining the vendor from alienating or encumbering the property. Particularly it is not maintained. Because when an injunction cannot be granted, Section 41 surplus H of the specific relief bank, when an evidences remedy can be obtained by the plaintiff, he is not entitled to get a degree for injunction. So on the data filing of the suit for injunction, the plaintiff has got right to file a suit for specific performance. He can very well obtain his efficacy remedy for specific performance. Instead of filing a suit for specific performance, if injunction suit simplicity is filed, the suit is not maintainable. The suit is not maintainable. Even if you obtain the permission under order 2, rule 3 of CPC. But each and every case goes on its own merits. This is reported in 2020, that gentleman. 2025 CTC, page 435. 2025 CTC, page 435. Now, there are cases. The defendant, the vendor, after receiving the entire sale consideration, execute a sale deed. And he will be called upon by the purchaser to come to the registrar office for registration. Suppose the vendor has not come to the registrar office to register the sale deed. He has already, sale deed was prepared. It was typed on the non-judicial stamp paper. It was duly executed by the vendor. It has also been duly witnessed. Refuses to come to the registrar office to register the document. Then what is the remedy available to the purchaser? Then what is the remedy available to the, whether he can be compelled to file a suit for specific performance? Because sale deed has already been executed, but provided it has not been registered. The answer is under section 77 of the Registration Act. When the executant refuses to come to the registrar office or denies the execution, the registrar may refuse to register the document. Then the purchaser may introduce a suit for registration of the document already executed. Registration of the sale deed already executed by the defendant only. It is a lesser relief provided under the Registration Act. But the larger relief is provided under the specific relief file. You can also buy the suit for specific performance, accompanying the defendant to execute a registered sale deed in your favor. But this is section 77 says, for only for limited purpose of registration of the sale deed alone. This is references 1982 to MLJ page 41. Elamal vs. Rangaswamy counter. And another one is 1991, 1 MLJ page 22 Madras. 1991, 1 MLJ page 22 Madras. Veryaswamy counter vs. Chinnaswamy counter. Then another important aspect. Whether the deposit of the balanced sale price into code is a condition precedent to institute a suit for specific. To deposit the balanced sale consultation into the code at the time of presenting is planned for specific performance. Section 16 specifically says, unless and otherwise the code directs the plaintiff to deposit the balanced sale price into code. The plaintiff need not jingle his coin. He need not deposit the balanced sale price into code. This is division bench of our Bombay High Court. Here I have 2009, notes of cases. Bombay, division bench, page 1054. AV deal tools and services vs. tough fasteners private limited. And in some cases the sale agreement may contain. Here we hereby attend to the sale agreement. I agree to buy the property on this total sale price of so and so. And the vendor is hereby income tax certificate from the income tax department. Or obtained clearance certificate from the land selling department. If conditions are imposed in the sale agreement. It is not the duty of the court to supervise whether the degree for specific performance can be granted on condition. So, the degree for specific performance must be simple. That's all. My degree is passed. It is the duty of the defendant to execute the sale deed in power of the plaintiff. If any conditions is imposed that you must obtain income tax certificate. You must get clearance from the selling department. No degree can be passed. So, degree for specific performance on condition cannot be passed. This is 1999, three law weekly, page 249, full bench address height code. In the case, the property of the vendor was taken over by the under the urban land selling act. Thereafter, the vendor entered in the sale agreement stating that he is taking steps to recover the property from the government. And the court said the agreement is against the public policy, public morality as contemplated under section 23 of the contract. The court cannot grant a degree for specific performance on condition that as and when the government return the property to the defendant, he has to execute the sale deed in power of the plaintiff. So, no condition can be imposed by granting a degree for specific performance. And in some cases, A enter into a sale agreement with B on the failure of the B to execute the sale deed, A filed a suit for specific performance. In that suit, some C filed an impeding application stating that he is the owner of the property, he is the title holder of the property, B has no title to the property, so he is a necessary party. Whether such impeding application can be allowed, whether such impeding application can be allowed, impeding application has to be dismissed. If it is allowed, then the suit for specific performance will be converted into a title suit. So, if any degree is passed, not against a true owner, then it will not binding him. So, he is not a necessary party. Now, the latest decision of the Supreme Court by the decision ended by Justice Ravindran as he then was, I think in Mumbai International case 2010 SCC, lots of it has categorically held. The plaintiff is the dominant status. He cannot be compelled to impede time taken carry as his opponent against his wishes. It is for the plaintiff to choose his opponent, how the court can compel you must impede some A, B or C. Suppose if any application is filed to impede the proposed party as a necessary party, if it is objected to by the plaintiff, the court has to simply dismiss the application provided. At the time of trial, if the court comes to the conclusion that so-and-so is the necessary party, then court may simply dismiss the suit on the ground of non-giant of necessary party under Order 1 Rule 9. So, just to minimize the work. So, if a person claiming title or better title, if you find an application to impede him as a party in the suit instituted by the purchaser against the person who has entered into a sale agreement, he is not a necessary party. This is Kasturi v. I. M. Burma. Kasturi v. I. M. Burma. 2005, 6 SCC, Page 733. 2005, 6 SCC, Page 733. Then coming to the relief which can be granted by the court in a suit for specific performance. The first which I would like to share with you is section 12 of the specific relief rights. Specific performance of part of contract. Specific performance of part of contract. Part of contract. I will give an illustration. One acre of land is agreed to bold by the vendor in favor of the purchase. Agreement was entered into, registered, everything is over. But after the execution of the sale agreement, suppose a major portion, say for example more than 50%, 50 cents or 60 cents, 75 cents, is acquired by the government to widen the road for highways and whatever purpose. Or for any public purpose. Then can the purchaser bring a suit for specific performance and claim in respect of entire one acre has to be held in his favor. That is why. Under those circumstances. But a party to contract is unable to perform the whole of his part. But the part which must be left unperformed has only a small portion. So only in respect of a small portion, a degree of specific performance can be granted. That is in respect of 25 cents. If 25 cents is already acquired already by the government. Then the remaining 25 cents can very well be. The degree for specific performance can be granted in respect of the remaining small portion. This is AR 2006, Uttarangal, page 76. AR 2006, Uttarangal, page 76. But you think otherwise. One acre of land has been agreed to be sold. Government has acquired only 25 cents. The remaining portion is 75 cents. Then section 12 says not to grant a degree for specific performance. Because he has already suffered by the action of the government. So if the portion of the contract left unperformed is considerable part of the world. And for that portion compensation would be determined in terms of money. So specific performance shall not be ordered. This is your high court. Punjab and Haryana. AR 2004, Punjab and Haryana, page 178. AR 2004, Punjab and Haryana, page 178. When there are so many sharers in respect of the joint family property. When anyone of the sharers entered into an agreement of sale. Stating that there are four sharers including himself. And he entered into the sale agreement for himself on behalf of other sharers. And he has agreed to procure the consent and signature of the other sharers. If any such sale agreement is entered into. And if a super specific performance is filed on the basis of the said sale agreement. And the other sharers denied the authority of the sharer who has entered into sale agreement. The court can degree KSUR for specific performance in respect of the share of the sharer who has entered into sale agreement. In respect of the property of other co-starers there cannot be any degree for specific performance. This is the decision of our Supreme Court. Reported in 2005, 5 SCC, page 142. 2005, 5 SCC, page 142. In some cases, Kharta enters into a sale agreement to sell the co-starry property. For the welfare of the family. On the refusal by the Kharta to execute sale agreement, sale deed. Then if any suit is filed for specific performance of the sale agreement. Executed by the Kharta including the other members of the co-personary. If they plead that the sale agreement executed by the Kharta is not for the welfare of the joint family. Grant a degree for specific performance in respect of the share of the Kharta. And not in respect of the entire extent of the property of the joint family. This one is reported in 2001, 5 SCC, page 396. 2001, 5 SCC, page 396. Then coming to suit for specific performance against Vendor and the subsequent purchase. If the suit is filed for specific performance, no doubt the baron of proof is on the right to prove his case. He has to prove his case only on his own strength. He cannot abandon his right and fall back upon the case of his opponent. That is well known principles of law. But in a suit for specific performance against Vendor and the subsequent purchase. The baron of proof is not on the plaintiff, it is on the subsequent purchase. Under section 19 of the specific written into sale agreement with V. He has already issued a notice expressing his readiness and willingness to purchase the property. Before filing the suit for specific performance. If the property agreed to be conveyed in favor of A is sold by the B in favor of C, the subsequent purchaser. The purchaser, the A, can very well maintain a suit for specific performance. Not only against B is Vendor and also against the subsequent purchaser C. If such a suit is filed, then the baron of proof is on the subsequent purchase. The subsequent purchaser has to satisfy the court for the purpose of dismissing the suit filed by specific performance. He has to satisfy the court. Number one, he has purchased the property without knowing the existence of the suit sale agreement between A and B. So he must plead that he is not aware of the sale agreement between A and B. Number two, he has paid the entire sale consideration on the date of execution of the sale. You please keep it in mind. He must prove that he has paid the entire sale consideration on the date of the execution of the sale. Here, I would like to remember you whether sale consideration must be paid only on the date of the execution of the sale. You please refer section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act. It says the consideration may be passed, consideration may be present and consideration may be future. So the payment of sale consideration need not be at the time of execution of the sale date. It may be passed or future. But here, the subsequent purchaser has to prove that he has paid the entire sale price. So this is an exception to section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act. So first one, he has to prove that he is not aware of the existence of the sale agreement between his vendor and the agreement holder plenty. Number two, he has paid the entire sale price on the date of execution of the sale in his favor. Third one, he has purchased the property in good faith. He has purchased the property in good faith. So only on satisfaction, on subjective satisfaction of all these three ingredients, subsequent purchaser, he can effectively resist this would fight by writing for specific problems. Then no degree can be granted. Now here, I would like to explain the word good faith. What it means? Then how to prove that he has purchased the property in good faith? When we look into the other enactments. Section 52 of Indian Biennale Code defines good faith. Section 2, H of the Limitation Act defines good faith. Section 3 subclass 22 of the General Tax Assign defines good faith. And act done bona fide, whether or not done diligently or not. So there must be some bona fide. What is the remedy available to the plaintiff non-suit the subsequent purchase? Then how the plaintiff can overcome these pleas? Then the plaintiff has to prove that the subsequent purchaser. Subsequent purchaser is well aware of the existence of the sale agreement. Knowing the same, he has purchased the property. He has not purchased the property, he has purchased litigation. Then how the plaintiff can prove that the subsequent purchaser is aware of the existence of the sale agreement? He may cost paper and publication in this regard before piling a suit for specific performance. So you can have water rather than... It may take only just 5 minutes. No issues, no issues. You can have water. You can impute the constructed notice on the part of the subsequent purchaser. If any paper publication is cost before piling the suit for specific performance by the plaintiff. In spite of the same, if any sale it is executed in favor of the subsequent purchaser, then he cannot plead the ignorance of the existence of the sale agreement. Because whether or not he has seen the paper publication or not, the plea of constructive notice will apply. In some cases, a mere sale it alone will be executed. A mere sale it alone is executed. Even without delivering the possession of the property agreed to be sold. So no ordinary prudent man would pay amount and get the sale deed in his favor without getting the property. Without taking delay of the property. Suppose the property is under the possession of the plaintiff. Who has obtained the possession of the presidents of the sale agreement? Ignoring the same if any sale it is executed, then the plaintiff in an action can plead that he is in possession of the property. These are all the documents to show that to prove his possession. So the subsequent purchaser has simply obtained only a sale deed, registered sale deed, that's all. He has not taken delay of the property. Then there is a question of bona fide on his part. So you can resist. The payment of entire sale concentration. Normally in the sale deed paid some amount so some of rupees towards the sale price. And you have already received the same or already received the same. So the payment must be now either by way of check, DD or now by the RGGS in NEPT whatever it may be. Because now to I think section 296 tribulations of income tax act and the value exceeds 20,000 and all the transaction must be only by way of check. So you can attack. No sale concentration was paid by the subsequent purchaser. There is no proof to show that he has paid the entire sale price. You cannot search any citation in this regard. This is my rich experience in practicing civil sign. It will be very useful to you. So the subsequent purchaser can resist the super specific performance by saying that he has purchased the property in good fight by the entire sale consideration and without knowing the existence of the sale agreement. At the same time, defendant can also resist the police of subsequent purchaser by proving that there is no payment of entire sale concentration that he is having constructive motives regarding the existence of the sale agreement. Other things. So the burden of propagates practicing in civil side are often committing mistake in a super specific performance filed by the plaintiff against his vendor and subsequent purchaser. They are producing a proof out of the plaintiff. They have come into the trial. Don't do that. If it is a super specific performance against the subsequent purchaser, you rely upon section 19 and ask the court, the burden of proof is on the subsequent purchaser. Letting him file this proof out of it as P.W.1. Letting him step in this case. You can defend it. So this is the 13th chapter. And the last one is a recession of degree for specific performance. So the propagates practicing in civil side are committing mistake after getting a degree for specific performance. Straight away they have levied a degree in execution by filing execution petition for the execution of the sale deed and for taking delivery of the property. Is it correct? Once a degree for specific performance is granted. I already reiterated it is assumes the character of the preliminary degree. So there will be direction to the plaintiff to deposit the balance sale price into the court in terms of order 20 rule 12 A of CTC. If the plaintiff degree holder fails to deposit the balance sale price into court within the time stipulated under the degree. Or within the time extended by the court, then the defendant judgment data may take out an application under section 28 of the specifically fact before the trial court itself. And he can ask for a recession of the degree on satisfaction that the defendant filed to deposit the balance sale price into court as mandated under the degree. Then the degree for specific performance will be resided by the trial court. You need not go to the execution court degree is resided section 28 further states. If the degree holder is already placed into possession, he has to re-deliver the possession of the property. He has to restore the possession to the vendor. If any renter property is received by the degree holder, he is bound to return the same sale price, deposit the same into court as for the degree. Then what are all the remedies that can be granted to the plaintiff degree holder? So after depositing the balance sale price, the plaintiff is entitled to file an application before the court of first instance. That is before the trial court itself, he can file an application under section 28, asking the court for the execution of the sale deed in his favor. And he can also pray for delivery of possession of the property in his favor, partition of the property. Say for example, I have already cited some citations. If one of the courts has entered the sale agreement and his share alone is decreed in favor of the plaintiff, the plaintiff after getting a degree for specific performance in respect of a particular share of the defendant and after the payment of the balance sale price into court, he can file an application under section 28 of the specific relief act, asking the court to partition the property and the car separate possession of the share of the defendant in his favor, as against the other courtship. So for getting this relief, for execution of sale deed, partition and separate possession and the delivery of possession of the property, no separate suit is necessary. No separate suit is necessary. You need not leave the degree in execution before the executing court, because the court which passes the degree retains its powers to grant the relief of execution of the sale deed and the delivery of possession of the property and the partition of the property in favor of the plaintiff who has succeeded. Unfortunately, we are committing mistake by filing execution petition. It is very pertinent. Getting an order from the execution court is not so easy. It's a very, very, very cumbersome process. There are lots of checks and balances, order 21, rule 1 to 106. There are so many applications. It is very easy to get a degree, but at the same time it is very, very difficult to execute a degree. So please keep in mind, after getting a degree for specific performance, I request you not to file execution petition by an application under section 28 of the specific deliverer. Ask the court to grant to execute a sale deed in favor. Ask the court to pass a delivery order. Ask the court if the degree is for, in respect of one of the share, then ask the court for partition of the property and for separate possession. This is year 1994. Supreme Court, page 1699. Year 1994 Supreme Court, page 1699. Year 2007, notes of cases. Page 70, Kerala High Court. Year 1994 Supreme Court, 1699. Rahman Kutty, Kuttha versus Awara. Year 2007, notes of cases. Page 70, Kerala High Court. Bhakmar Raja versus E Sanjeev. Deeper specific performance is granted. Suppose the court directs a plaintiff to deposit the balance sale price into court within two months. For example, plaintiff is not in a position to pay the balance sale price within two months. Then immediately he put an application for extension of time. Seeking leave or permission of the court to extend the period for another two months so as to facilitate him to pay the balance sale price into permission immediately. The plaintiff's right to get a specific performance degree. He must prove that he is possessing sufficient funds to pay the balance sale price. When an application is taken out seeking extension of time to pay the balance sale price, it implies that he has no funds to pay the balance sale price. You may say at the time of trial he has proved his financial status, but after the degree, that must be handled by the court very reluctantly. Before ordering permission to extend the time, the court must exercise its power. In some cases I say that the defendant plaintiff has to deposit the balance sale price within two months. The plaintiff in some cases, even without filing an application for extension of time, straight away they will deposit the amount into execution court or before the trial court and file an application for execution of the sentence. Then the supreme court says that the deposit of balance sale price must be within the stipulated time or within the extended time passed by the court. If no application is filed, if any such deposit is made, dismiss the petition or dismiss the execution petition. Don't execute the sale deed, don't order delivery of property. Yes, Palanichami Chettiar versus Adagapan. Here 1999 Supreme Court, page 918. You, yes Palanichami Chettiar versus Adagapan. Here 1999 Supreme Court, page 918. The lecture covers the reliefs which can be granted by the court in a super specific performance. I hope all the participants would appreciate my efforts and if any mistake in the course of my lecture is there, please excuse me. And I have taken my sincere efforts to cite the Supreme Court cases. But sometimes I used to cite our high court judgments. Next time I will try to get the citations of Anjab and Hariyana High Court. And with this, I may conclude this session. Mr. Vikas Ji and Aailakshmi madam. Aailakshmi madam, please unmute. We are asking her to unmute. Yes sir. I am concluded in these sessions now. Mr. Shankar, if any participants are having any doubts or they have any questions, they may post it in the chat box and I will open it and I will answer. That's true. They can even ask for the unmuting, we can unmute them also. Okay. Chat box will open. Whatever one could have thought of any relief or whatever one could have contemplated could have been discussed. You have discussed actually that. And since you were saying that next time you will contemplate to have the judgments of Pajab Hariyana, I would say that we have the audience. Not only from Pajab Hariyana, we also have participants on our WhatsApp group from Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh. So sometimes I also feel that I never knew that they also have the same provisions. So they say, because once we read the 9-2 quote, etc., then I used to say that we are from Sri Lanka and we are from Madras, but we have shifted to our studies in Sri Lanka, etc. Sri Lanka is more or less like the Tamil and Indian Act. A lot of people from Pakistan also do join. Not all common countries are having the same Act. Yeah. So pan India, we have the audience. So even if your judgments are there, it may not be binding upon the other icots, but at least it has a pervasive value. That is the law as such. No, no, no, no. The judgment rendered by one icot will also bind to the other icot because the point is only on the law. The law laid out by the icots. But sometimes the correct proportion of law is analyzed by the icot in many decisions rendered. Then it can be followed. Of course, under Article 141, law laid out by the Supreme Court will bind to the subordinate judiciary including the icot. But the same doesn't mean that the judgment rendered by the one icot will not bind to the other icot unless some changes are there in the particular Act. No, but normally the courts say, if they want to differ, they would say that in case of the same icot, it is binding or you refer to a larger bench. But for the other icots, it is a pervasive value. It may not bind in the fashion and the same judgment of that icot. But next time I will try to court the Supreme Court decisions. All judgments are good as long as it's a knowledge. Actually, even if it is from the different icot, you get a path from where you can move forward for your drafting, for your arguments. That's the way I've always thought about. So I'm just thinking as to whether we have any questions. Thank you. Srinivas, what is the difference between a part performance and specific performance? Yes, part performance is defined under section 53A of the transfer of property. Suppose on the data of the distribution of the sale agreement or in presence of the sale agreement, if the purchase is placed in question of the property, then his remedy is to file a suit for specific performance. To get a degree for specific performance, get a sale deed registered in his payment. Suppose the time to file a suit for specific performance is far. But still he is in possession of the property. Can he get an order of inspection? First thing in the vendor from interfering with his possession and enjoyment of the property. This is otherwise known as part performance. No doubt, the purchaser in possession of the property in presence of the sale agreement can very well maintain a suit for injunction. Despite the fact that his right to get a degree for specific performance is far by limitation. But when we see the section 53A of the transfer of property closely, we will understand before getting the benefit of part performance, the purchaser who wants to avail the benefit must be established that he has been or always ready to perform this part of contract. These are all some external circumstances in which he was not in a position to get a degree for specific performance. Unless and until he establishes his readiness and willingness, even if he is in possession of the property, the benefit of 53A cannot be granted in this favor. So part performance he can persist, not only as a shield and as well as as a swear against the vendor. Provided he must establish that he was ready and willing to perform this part of publication. But the breach is only on the part of being vendor. Then only he is entitled to get the benefit of part performance. Now the section 171A of registration has been amended. Whereby the suit for specific performance, when the sale agreement contains a delivery of the property, it must be registered compulsory. If it is not registered, you cannot get the benefit of 53A. That is the very object of the amendment. Because not only is amendment was made, not only is new section was inserted by under section 171 subclass A, but section 49 of registration act has also been amended. 53A is deleted. And 53A of TPR has also been amended to that effect. So for the purpose of getting the benefit of 53A, you must establish that your sale agreement is registered. You must establish that you are ready and willing to perform your part of contract. And even though the time to file the suit for specific performance is barred by effects of time, since you are in process of endowment property, you can very well resist the vendor for interfering with work process in endowment. You can save your work process. Next. Murugan, how to approach the execution proceedings and specific relief act? Whether section 28 of specific relief act is sufficient? Yes, certainly. Certainly. Section 28 of the specific relief act, it gives enormous power on the court of first instance to grant the relief of execution of document, sale deed, to grant the delivery of possession, just to go through it, read it, and also for partition. If the delivery is ordered, directing the dependent to execute the degree to deliver the possession of the property, then you may limit the degree in execution. But normally once delivery is ordered, you can very well file an application because you need not file an execution petition. You can also file an application before the trial court. You can take assistance of the police, right? And you can also ask the court to implement the data. No execution petition is necessary. Section 28 of specific relief act gives enormous power on the trial court to grant the relief. No separate suit is the word employed is. No separate suit for getting the relief mentioned under section 28 is not necessary. Next. Gopi, if seeking partition under section 28 of specific relief act, what is the court fees as such? Yes. Now, you have filed a suit by specific performance against the person who has entered the sale agreement in respect of his share. Suppose degree for specific performance is granted. Then you got to file an application for partition separate possession. So under the application filed under section 28, you got to pay court fees for the partition. Now it is 5,000 rupees according to our Tamil Nadu court fees amendment made in the Tamil Nadu court fees input valuation. Provided you are enjoined first of the property. You are not enjoined first of the property. The enjoined possession means your vendor. When vendor is enjoined possession, then you got to pay court fees that you are also deemed to be because you are stepping into the source of your vendor. So you may pay court fees of rupees 5,000 and get the order for partition separate possession. This is very rare. Normally nobody will do this, but section is there. We are not using that section. That is our problem. No, we don't have any questions. Before you part for the day, I will say Adilakshmi ma'am will share her insights and then you will conclude for the day. Thank you so much, sir. In fact, we know Shankar Murali sir for a very long time. And usually we used to have a bilingual session speaking in our mother tongue Tamil. This is a new thing sir taking the session all through in English. But he did a very good, excellent job. And we all know sir is in Cyclopedia in civil jurisprudence day down south. Anything we can ask sir, you can explain us. Thank you so much sir for coming in and it was a very excellent session that we has entered into a new office. Usually his office was a different office. So he has to, I think he has to set right his office. There were some echoes or outside noises coming in. There was a little bit on the chat box I could see. Maybe when we have the next session everything will be all getting cleared. We should thank his little junior Haritha for getting us all the citations. But we thank Haritha sir you can tell she has to leave sir. Haritha stays 30 kilometers away from the place she works in. So she is traveling so long as a young girl because of the passion for the profession she has. Thank you so much beyond all CLC and my dear brother Vikas for connecting north and south continuously. East and west everything, all parts of India getting connected in Vikas platform on Zoom. He is a bridge between south and north. Almost all over India now I come to know he has people from Bangladesh, Pakistan. And he is the right ambassador for India for all the states. Maybe everything gets easy going easy. On behalf of everyone here I thank Shankar Police sir and because I thank the team Legal Eagles Relight and the family of Legal Eagles Relight was helping us in posting all the citations. Srinivasan, Annie and every Shankari and everyone. Thank you sir, thank you so much. Thank you all because of Shankar sir we are proud to feel north and we have few more speakers on the line will be coming up. Thank you sir. Thank you so much. Thank you Vikas. Thank you. Before we part for the day as Adilakshmi ma'am said it was in she said that you are an encyclopedia and she said that it was for the first time you were speaking not in bilingual but English. But I would just cut her short. No I say that once if a person is an encyclopedia then he can play at ease with everything. I am reminded David Warner can play with left and right ease and click it anyway. So same way you can't say that he cannot play straight or he cannot play with the left hand. So once who is the good speaker and who is having immense knowledge for him it is his choice, his choice of words, his command over the subject is what it matters and ultimately he can always speak on the language of what he wants to convey. And as everyone was saying that kindly connect with Mr. Shankar Murli the session would be amazing. And so it was and that that's what they say that everything travels but good will travels though it is travels though but it travels actually and what it was and tomorrow the master class would be on the court fees act and suit valuation act. This is by S. S. Senior Advocate. He's also writing a book and a revised version of this thing. His book is already a huge success. So do stay connected with us tomorrow at 4pm. Everyone stay safe. Stay blessed. And we are also thankful to the team of Ari Lakshmi Lagomoti. Because of her I can say that people log in more. Thank you everyone stay safe. Thank you so much.