LI Network
Published on: January 23, 2024 at 14:45 IST
The Karnataka High Court has emphasized that while the bank balance of a party is a relevant consideration for assessing readiness and willingness to execute a sale agreement, it is not an absolute prerequisite.
Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum, in a single-judge bench, stated that a plaintiff’s financial constraints should not be a prohibitory factor if their actions and expressions demonstrate a genuine desire to fulfill contractual obligations.
The Court stressed that evaluating readiness and willingness involves a broader spectrum of commitment and integrity beyond financial largesse.
The observations were made while dismissing an appeal by Anjinamma and others challenging the appellate court’s order directing them to execute a sale agreement with plaintiff Mohammed Sajjad Sait.
Sait filed a suit for specific performance based on an agreement to sell, alleging a breach of contract by defendants 1 and 2, who offered to sell land measuring around 2 acres.
The trial court, citing the plaintiff’s bank statement, held that he failed to prove readiness and willingness to complete the transaction.
However, the Karnataka HC noted that a plaintiff need not have sufficient bank balance at the relevant time, and Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act requires a continuous state of readiness and willingness throughout litigation. The court emphasized considering the totality of circumstances, including the conduct of both parties, and rejected the defendants’ claim of hardship, stating it was due to their grossly unfair conduct.
The Court dismissed the appeals, highlighting the defendants’ failure to update records for the sale transaction and their false defense against the plaintiff’s financial capacity and readiness to perform his part of the contract.
Case Title: Anjinamma & Others vs. Mohammed Sajjad Sait & ANR