Introduction:

The specific Relief Act, 1877

was introduced to ensure
justice, equity and fairness. This
law gave
emphasis on title. Title is an
important criterion for contract
as well as it is a proof of
ownership
of property. The Specific Relief
Act, 1877 has clear regulations
regarding the rights of a person
with absolute title, imperfect
title. And consequences if a
person contracts who have no
title.
Absolute title: This is the
most supreme form of
ownership which gives the
title holder full
access to the property. And
absolute title is an example
of good title which is free
from all
hindrances and can be
protected. The absolute title
holder has the full authority to
contract for
sell or lease as well as can use
the property for his own good.
Imperfect title: The title which
has some hindrances or some
condition attached to it. To
make
the title absolute as well as to
gain authority and enjoy the
property fully the title holder
needs to
fulfill something more. Such as:
to take permission from others
to sell or lease or to release it
from mortgage etc.
Contrastingly, the person who
has no title in the property has
no right to contract for sale or
lease
for property and cannot enjoy
and customize the property.
When the seller has no right to
sell will not get decree for the
specific performance of
1
contract.
Section 18 and 25 of The
Specific Relief Act, 1877 has
clear rulings of title to
property. The
explanations of these sections
are discussed below.
Section 18: section 18 of this
act stated that the seller or lesser
contracted to sell or lease
property
on which they have only
imperfect title. And the
buyer has rights against the
seller with
imperfect title.
1 Gul Muhammad khan PLD 1956
(WP) Kar 514; PLD (1954) FC 53
Hazara University Dhodial ManSehra
Department Of Law

Submitted To: Sir Saqib Javaid

Submitted By: Syed Waseem Shah
Roll NO: 48074
Semester: LLB 8th
Topic: Section 18th of specific relief act

The person who is

contracting to purchase
has right and which is
recognized and
enforceable at
2
law.
In three circumstances the
seller or lesser title
becomes defective or
imperfect.
Firstly, the seller or lesser
had imperfect title or no
concern in the assets
during the contract.
Secondly, the seller or
lesser needs permission or
conformity of others to sell
or lease.
Thirdly, the seller or lesser
title is imperfect due to the
property is in mortgage.
In these circumstances the
buyer or lessee can
compel the seller or
lesser as soon as he
gain
absolute title. The buyer or
lessee also has right to
compel the seller to gain
such conformity to
validate title and the buyer
also can impel the seller
or lesser to trade in the
mortgage if the
selling price is more than
the mortgage amount.
Furthermore, if the seller
or lesser sues buyer or
lessee for nonpayment and
in the event that the buyer
or lessee establish the
imperfect title of the
seller or lesser at that
point the court will dismiss
the case and will tell the
plaintiff to return the
advance in case taken and
to return the all costs of
3
suit spent by defendant.
Section 25: This section
says that the person who
has contracted to sell or
lease has no title in the
property or he is a
voluntary settler. It is
apparent that if the
person claims for
specific
performance his case will
be dismissed. In three
circumstances the
contract cannot be
enforced in
favor of seller or lesser.
Firstly, the person who
knows that he has no
interest in the property
cannot make a contract for
sale or lease.
Contract of sale cannot be
imposed in favor of a seller
when he knew that he had
no title to the
4
land to be sold.
2 7 DLR (FC) 70
3 Specic Relief Act 1877, s18
4 Bajrang Lal vs Akshed Ali 35
DLR 110
Dated: 23-05-2021

Introduction:

The specific Relief Act, 1877 was introduced to ensure justice, equity and fairness. This
law gave emphasis on title. Title is an important criterion for contract as well as it is a
proof of ownership of property. The Specific Relief Act, 1877 has clear regulations
regarding the rights of a person with absolute title, imperfect title. And consequences if
a person contracts who have no title.

Absolute title: This is the most supreme form of ownership which gives the title holder
full access to the property. And absolute title is an example of good title which is free
from all hindrances and can be protected. The absolute title holder has the full authority
to contract for sell or lease as well as can use the property for his own good.
Imperfect title: The title which has some hindrances, or some condition attached to it.
To make the title absolute as well as to gain authority and enjoy the property fully the
title holder needs to fulfill something more. Such as: to take permission from others to
sell or lease or to release it from mortgage etc.

Contrastingly, the person who has no title in the property has no right to contract for
sale or lease for property and cannot enjoy and customize the property.

When the seller has no right to sell will not get decree for the specific performance of
contract.

Section 18 and 25 of The Specific Relief Act, 1877 has clear rulings of title to property.
The explanations of these sections are discussed below.

Section 18:

section 18 of this act stated that the seller or lesser contracted to sell or lease
property on which they have only imperfect title. And the buyer has rights against the
seller with imperfect title.

The person who is contracting to purchase has right and which is recognized and
enforceable at law.

In three circumstances the seller or lesser title becomes defective or imperfect.

Firstly, the seller or lesser had imperfect title or no concern in the assets during the
contract.

Secondly, the seller or lesser needs permission or conformity of others to sell or lease.

Thirdly, the seller or lesser title is imperfect due to the property is in mortgage.

In these circumstances the buyer or lessee can compel the seller or lesser as soon as
he gains absolute title. The buyer or lessee also has right to compel the seller to gain
such conformity to validate title and the buyer also can impel the seller or lesser to trade
in the mortgage if the selling price is more than the mortgage amount. Furthermore, if
the seller or lesser sues buyer or lessee for nonpayment and in the event that the buyer
or lessee establish the imperfect title of the seller or lesser at that point the court will
dismiss the case and will tell the plaintiff to return the advance in case taken and to
return all costs of suit spent by defendant. 1

Section 25:

This section says that the person who has contracted to sell or lease has no title in the
property, or he is a voluntary settler. It is apparent that if the person claims for specific
performance his case will be dismissed. In three circumstances the contract cannot be
enforced in favor of seller or lesser.

Firstly, the person who knows that he has no interest in the property cannot make a
contract for sale or lease.

Contract of sale cannot be imposed in favor of a seller when he knew that he had no
title to the land to be sold.

Secondly, if the seller or lesser fail to show the evidence that his title is absolute
beyond reasonable doubt.

Thirdly, if the seller or lesser made a settlement of the contract before entering into it.

These are the circumstances where the specific performance will not go in favor of
seller or lesser for having no title in property. 2

Differences:

From the above explanation of section 18 and 25 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 we
can see there are some differences between them.

Section 18 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 is the seller or lesser has contracted to sell or
lease the property with imperfect title. The title has some hindrances and condition
1
2
attached to it. On the other hand, in section 25 of this act the seller or lesser has no title
in the property contract to sell or lease.

Since title of the suit property is under debate and the defendants have demonstrated
that the debated property was under ownership of Taher Ali, and the defendants have

been owning or having the suit arrive by changing their names. Discretional power
cannot be worked out to allow equitable relief in a suit for specific performance of
contract.3

Moreover, in section 18 of this act the buyer has right against the seller with imperfect
title and can impel the seller or lesser to authenticate the title and can implement the
contract. Contrastingly,

in section 25 the buyer has no right to compel the seller or lesser to authenticate the title
because it is not possible to make absolute title as the seller or lesser has no title.

If the individual who has no right to contract for sell or lease still contracted for sell or
lease of the property. As soon as he obtained rights the other party can sue him and
can compel him for specific performance of contract.

Furthermore, in section 18 of this act there is a probability that the seller or lesser
imperfect title will be absolute, and the contract can be specifically enforced. Instead in
section 25 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 it is understandable that the title of the seller
or lesser will not be absolute and the contract cannot be specifically enforced.

If the plaintiff made a contract of sale or rent of the subject matter of which he has no
title, cannot sue for the specific performance of the contract.

To conclude, section 18 and 25 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877 is about title to property
and the explanation and differences between them are discussed above briefly. Title is
a key to enjoy one’s rights in the property and give rights to deliver property that is also
stated clearly in these sections.

3
 Secondly, if the seller or lesser fail to show the evidence that his title is
absolute beyond
reasonable doubt.
Thirdly, if the seller or lesser made a settlement of the contract before entering into it.
These are the circumstances where the specific performance will not go in favor of
seller or