MAN KAUR(DEAD)BY LRS. vs HARTAR SINGH SANGHA — C.A. No. 147 - 148/2001
Case under Section IV. Status: Disposed.
CNR: SCIN010056062000
Filing Date
30-Mar-2000
Registration No
C.A. No. 147 - 148/2001
Diary Number
5606/2000
Order Date
05-Oct-2010
Document Type
Judgment - of Main Case
Disposal Type
Allowed
Last updated 02-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.MAN KAUR(DEAD)BY LRS.
Adv. P. I. JOSE
Respondent(s)
-
1.HARTAR SINGH SANGHA
Adv. E. C. AGRAWALA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
05-Oct-2010
Judgment - of Main CaseView PDF
-
05-Oct-2010
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
02-Feb-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
29-Jan-2009
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
18-Nov-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
06-Nov-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
17-Jul-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Apr-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
12-Mar-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
05-Feb-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
16-Jan-2008
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
04-Dec-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
14-Nov-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
09-Oct-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
24-Jul-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
21-Mar-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
22-Feb-2007
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
03-Jan-2001
ROP - of Main CaseView PDF
-
30-Mar-2000
Case filed
Registration No. C.A. No. 147 - 148/2001
Case Summary: Man Kaur v. Hartar Singh Sangha Court: Supreme Court of India Citation: C.A. No. 147-148/2001 Date: October 5, 2010 Decision The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and dismissed the plaintiff's suit for specific performance, finding the plaintiff failed to prove he was "ready and willing" to perform his contractual obligations as required by Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. The earnest money was forfeited to the defendant. Key Facts - Agreement of sale dated October 20, 1978 for property in Chandigarh (Rs. 1,50,000/-) with December 20, 1978 completion deadline - Plaintiff (NRI in UK) represented by attorneys; defendant (Man Kaur) also represented by her husband - Performance date extended to June 7, 1979 - Plaintiff failed to appear in court or give evidence; relied entirely on property dealer's testimony - On June 7, 1979, defendant's attorney came ready to execute deed but plaintiff admitted lacking full funds Core Issue Whether plaintiff satisfied the mandatory statutory requirement of proving continuous "readiness and willingness" to perform contract obligations for specific performance relief. Court's Reasoning The Court emphasized that Section 16(c) mandates plaintiffs must personally establish readiness and willingness through credible evidence. Since the plaintiff never testified and his attorney (appointed later) had no personal knowledge of pre-1980 events, no valid evidence proved plaintiff's financial capacity or intent to perform. The correspondence and defendant's testimony (unrebutted) showed plaintiff lacked funds on the critical date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts