In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court dismissed a plea for specific performance in the execution of a re-conveyance deed, emphasizing that such a claim presupposes ownership by the opposing party. The court highlighted that the plaintiff, in this case, denied any right or title of the defendant over the property, making the relief of specific performance inappropriate.
The legal dispute involved Madhavan and Kaladevi, a father-daughter duo, as plaintiffs, and Kanakavally as the defendant—a friend of the second plaintiff. The plaintiffs asserted that the contested property belonged to the first plaintiff. According to their case, the defendant provided a loan as security, leading to the execution of a sale deed. The plaintiffs argued that this transaction was merely on paper and not acted upon. Subsequently, without the knowledge of the first plaintiff, the second plaintiff relinquished her rights to the defendant.
Despite a subsequent agreement to assign the property back to the second plaintiff or her nominee, issues arose when the defendant attempted to sell the property instead. The plaintiffs filed a suit seeking injunction and specific performance of the contract.
While the trial court initially granted specific performance, the High Court overturned the decision, prompting the appeal to the Supreme Court. The apex court, upon reviewing the case, emphasized that seeking specific performance implies acceptance of the defendant’s title. Notably, the court pointed out specific pleadings stating that the second plaintiff had no authority to transfer her share to the defendant.
The judgment noted the contradiction between the claim of no right or title transferred to the defendant and the plea for specific performance, which assumes the defendant’s ownership. The court also observed that the plaintiffs had not taken legal action to declare the sale deed null and void.
In light of these considerations, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal in the case of MADHAVAN (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. vs. KANAKAVALLY. The ruling clarifies the legal intricacies surrounding claims for specific performance in re-conveyance deed disputes when the plaintiff denies the defendant’s title in the property.
