Specific Relief

Syllabus for the Examination

1. Introduction of the Specific Relief Act, 1963

 Nature, scope, principles

2. Recovering Possession of Property

 Section 5 and 6 – Immovable property

 Section 7 and 8- Movable Property

3. Defenses available under law of Contract can be availed- Section 9

4. Specific Performance of the Contracts

 Section 10

 Section 11(2)

 Section 14

 Section 16

 Section 12 Specific Performance of a part of a contract

Cases Discussed in the Class

Section 5 and 6

1. Sukhjeet singh v. Sirajunnisa , AIR 2001 MP59

2. T.T. Devasthanas v. K.M. Krishnaih, AIR 1998 SC1132

3. Poonam Ram v. Moti Ram,( 2019)

 Suit for possession under section 5 can be filed on the basis of

possessory title or settled possession.

4. Midrapur jamindary co. Ltd. V Kumar Naresh Narayan Ray & Others

(1924)

 The person who is in a settled possession can protect his

possession even against the true owner.

5. Nair service Society Ltd V. K.C Alexander, 1968

 Defacto Possession

 The plaintiff was in possession of the property for 70 years. The SC

held that the rightful owner did not come forward within the period

of limitation 12years, so his right was lost and possessory owner

acquires absolute title. He was in Defacto possession (in reality).

Section 7 and 8

6. State of Gujarat v. Biharilal, AIR 1999 Sc1999

7. Kizhakkumpurath v. Thanikkuzhiyil, AIR 1998 Ker 244

 There was an oral and documentary evidence that the plaintiff was

the owner of certain scheduled items and the defendants had

 trespassed into those items. The plaintiff was held entitled to

recover those items from the defendants and also compensation as

well.

8. G J Subbarayulu v. Arman Annamalai Chattiar (AIR 1945 Mad281)

 R delivered to A a cinematograph projector under a contract that A

was to pay for the projector instalments, the ownership not to pass

to A until the price had been paid in full. R had the option to

cancel the contract on default of any instalment. A defaulted and R

exercised the option of demanding the return of machine. It was

held that after R had terminated the contract, A held it in a

fiduciary capacity, and A held it on behalf of R and liable to return

it.

Specific Performance of the Contracts

Section 10, 11(2), 14, 16, 12 (part Performance of the contract)

9. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Amritsar Gas Services, (1991)

10. P. Meenakshisundaram v. P. Vijaya Kumr, (2018)15 SCC 80

11. Kalawati v. Rakesh Kumar, AIR2018 SC 960

12. Baikunthi Devi v. Mahendra Nath, AIR 1977 SC 1514

13. Surjit Kaur v. Naurata Singh, AIR 2000 SC2927

14. Kartar Singh v. Harjinder Singh, AIR 1990 SC854

15. Pancham Dhara & others v. Monmatha Nath Maity, (2006)5

SCC340
Note: Do follow and discus the illustrations and examples that have

been discussed in the class.