N.P. Thirugnanam v R. Jagan Mohan Rao

Facts

The plaintiff sought specific performance of an agreement to sell, and the question was whether he had established continuous readiness and willingness, including the financial capacity to pay the consideration, throughout the relevant period.

Issues

• What 'ready and willing' requires of a plaintiff under section 16(c)
• Whether continuous financial capacity to pay the consideration must be proved from the date of contract to the date of decree

Arguments

The plaintiff contended he was willing to perform and entitled to a decree. The defendant contended that the plaintiff lacked the financial resources to pay the price and so was not genuinely ready and willing throughout.

Held

The Supreme Court held that the words 'ready and willing' require the plaintiff to be prepared to carry out his part of the contract to its logical end. The court must consider the plaintiff's conduct before and after the suit and the surrounding circumstances; the amount payable must be proved to be available right from the execution of the contract until the date of decree. Where the evidence shows the plaintiff never had the resources to fulfil his contract, specific performance must be refused. The court may infer readiness and willingness from the facts and circumstances.

Ratio decidendi

Continuous readiness and willingness — including proven financial capacity to pay the consideration from the date of contract until decree — is a mandatory condition for specific performance; want of funds defeats the claim.

Significance

A constantly cited authority on the substance of readiness and willingness and the centrality of proven financial capacity; the touchstone for assessing a purchaser's resources in subsequent decisions such as Man Kaur, JP Builders and P. Daivasigamani.

Related