A. Shahul Hameed v. N. Malligarjuna 2026 INSC 573 - CPC - Second Appeal - Specific Performance - Readiness & Willingness

Specific Relief Act, 1963 — Section 16(c) — Readiness and willingness — Nature, proof and manner of assessment — Continuous readiness and willingness is a condition precedent to a decree for specific performance; the plaintiff must both aver and prove that he was always ready and willing to perform his part, and such readiness and willingness is to be gathered from the entirety of facts and circumstances, including the conduct of the plaintiff prior and subsequent to the suit and the availability of consideration; mere pleadings are not sufficient and the court may infer readiness and willingness from the plaintiff’s conduct and the totality of surrounding circumstances. — (Paras 17, 17.1, 17.2, 21) [Context: In this case, SC held that merely because the legal notice came to be issued after expiry of four months from the stipulated period mentioned in the agreement, the same by itself cannot lead to an inference that the plaintiff was not ready and willing to perform the contract, especially when the suit itself was instituted well within the prescribed period of limitation. (Para 19)

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Section 100 — Second appeal — Scope of interference with concurrent findings of fact — Jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 100 CPC is confined to cases involving a substantial question of law; re‑appreciation of evidence and interference with concurrent findings of fact is impermissible unless such findings are perverse, based on no evidence, or suffer from material illegality or misreading of evidence, and merely because another possible view may arise from the same material does not justify interference in second appeal. — (Paras 10, 11 to 11.4) [Context: SC restored the Trial Court decreeing the suit for specific performance ]