Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court considered an appeal against the judgment of the Delhi High Court Division Bench which had allowed an application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC and decreed the suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell. The appellants, defendants in the suit, had filed a written statement disputing the genuineness of the agreement dated 3.5.2005, alleging forgery of signatures, and denying receipt of Rs.3 crores in cash. They also raised preliminary objections regarding maintainability and lack of readiness and willingness on the part of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs had filed an application for judgment on admissions, which was dismissed by the Single Judge but allowed by the Division Bench. The Supreme Court held that the admissions relied upon by the plaintiffs were not clear and unambiguous, as the defendants had consistently disputed the agreement and the receipt of consideration. The Court emphasized that Order XII Rule 6 CPC requires unequivocal admissions, and where there are serious disputes, the matter must go to trial. The Court also noted that the plaintiffs had amended the plaint to incorporate a plea of readiness and willingness only after the written statement, which did not constitute an admission by the defendants. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the Division Bench judgment and remanded the matter to the Single Judge for trial, directing expeditious disposal.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XII Rule 6 - Judgment on Admissions - The court can pass a judgment on admissions only when the admissions are clear, unambiguous, and unequivocal. Where the defendants have disputed the genuineness of the agreement and the receipt of consideration, there is no clear admission warranting a decree under Order XII Rule 6. (Paras 11-14) B) Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 16 - Readiness and Willingness - In a suit for specific performance, the plaintiff must plead and prove readiness and willingness to perform the contract. The amendment of the plaint to incorporate such plea after the written statement does not create an admission by the defendant. (Paras 9, 15) C) Contract Law - Concluded Contract - For a decree of specific performance, there must be a concluded contract. Where the defendants have raised serious disputes about the terms and execution of the agreement, the matter requires trial and cannot be decided summarily under Order XII Rule 6. (Paras 8, 13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in allowing the application under Order XII Rule 6 CPC and decreeing the suit for specific performance on the basis of alleged admissions, when the defendants had raised serious disputes regarding the genuineness of the agreement and the receipt of consideration.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Division Bench, and remanded the matter to the Single Judge for trial, directing expeditious disposal within one year.
Law Points
- Order XII Rule 6 CPC
- Judgment on admissions
- Specific performance
- Concluded contract
- Readiness and willingness
- Section 16 Specific Relief Act
- 1963
