Agreement to sell -- Specific performance - Plaintiff has proved the service of notice of demand to the defendant - Suit is filed within limitation and subsequent purchasers did not raise a plea of delay and laches - There are concurrent findings of three Courts on the issue of readiness and willingness shown by first plaintiff - No interference warranted in said findings..........
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order 1, Rule 10 -- Impleadment of a party - Suit for specific performance - Necessary party - Petitioner claims suit property as joint family property in which he has undivided share - Impleadment would convert suit for specific performance of contract into suit for title - Impleadment cannot be granted...........
Agreement to sell -- Specific performance - Undivided share of property of co-owners - S.12 of Specific Relief Act cannot be invoked by vendee to obtain sale of undivided share of co-owners with a right to force partition who were not parties to agreement of sale. (Specific Relief Act, 1963, S.12)...........
Agreement to sell -- Suit for specific performance - Property belonged to Hindu Undivided Family in which minors had share - Minors were not party to the agreement - No evidence to prove that there was any legal necessity for sale of property - Held, Courts below were justified in refusing relief of specific performance...........
Agreement to sell -- Suit for specific performance - Undivided or undemarcated property - Decree for specific performance can be granted - Vendee has a right to apply for partition of the property and get the share demarcated...........
Agreement to sell -- Suit for specific performance - Agreement executed by defendants 1 & 2 in respect of 3rd defendant also - No recital in the agreement that it was executed on behalf of the 3rd defendant also - 3rd defendant or his L.R's not bound by the terms of agreement - Property undivided - No relief sought for partition and separation of 3rd defendant's share in..........
Specific Relief Act, Section 19(1)(b) -- 000/- on 2.4.1974-Suit by plaintiff for specific performance-On appreciation of evidence defendant No. 2 held to be bona fide purchaser for value without notice-Specific performance declined. - 000/- on 27.3.1974 ; subsequently defendant No. 1 sold remaining `A share in property to defendant No. 2 for ,R. ,S. 30, - 000/- on..........
