Property Transactions and Legal Ramifications : Supreme Court Answers in Its Latest Judgment

Property Transactions and Legal Ramifications : Supreme Court Answers in Its Latest Judgment

In the recent case of Harish Kumar v. Amar Nath [2025] GCtR 1391 (SC) a case in respect of property was filed. Here, suit for specific performance for agreement for sale was filed. It was held that to succeed in a suit for specific performance, the plaintiff has to prove (a) the existence of a valid agreement of sale, (b) that the defendant committed breach of contract; and (c) that the plaintiff was always ready and willing to perform his part of the obligations in terms of the contract.

In this case, A alleged that B after receipt of payment, B did not turned up for registration of sale deed. B denied having signed on agreement for sale. When suit was filed by A, it was dismissed by Trial Court. First appellate Court also dismissed the appeal filed by A. But, HC allowed the second appeal filed by A. Said decision of HC was set aside by Supreme Court. 

It was held that there is a distinction between burden of proof and onus of proof, and that onus of proof has greater force when the issue is which party is to begin forwarding evidence in support of a proposition. Ultimately, specific performance of agreement of sale was found unsuccessful. 

It was concluded that party had failed to valid suit agreement. It is interesting to note that the time lag in execution of sale deed and the agreement for sale was taken note of by appellate Court (see page nos. 4 &5).