Summary
The Supreme Court upheld dismissal of a housing society’s specific-performance suit because execution of the sale agreements, payment of earnest money and delivery of possession remained unproved. Concurrent findings were open to correction under Article 136 for manifest injustice, but no such defect existed here. Its separate challenge to disposal of the rival purchaser’s appeal was not maintainable, and refund was also refused on the particular facts.
Issues
- Whether the concurrent findings against execution, payment and possession warranted interference.
- Whether the society could challenge disposal of the rival purchaser’s appeal or obtain refund of unproved earnest money.
Provisions considered
- Article 136, Constitution of IndiaConcurrent factual findings do not create an absolute jurisdictional bar, but interference requires a demonstrated manifestly unreasonable or unjust finding. That burden was not discharged. (¶¶ 12, 13, 14, 16, 19)
Held
- The rival purchaser’s appeal had been disposed of without adjudication after the owners executed a sale deed. No adverse decree or finding against the society resulted from that disposal; its appeal challenging that order was therefore not maintainable. (¶¶ 5, 10, 12)
- The society did not establish execution through the available attestors, co-purchasers or other adequate evidence after signatures were denied. Payment and the consent or authority of the non-signing co-owner were also unproved. The supported concurrent findings were neither manifestly unreasonable nor unjust. (¶¶ 13, 14, 15, 16)
- Without proof of the agreements, specific performance could not be granted. The Court consequently found it unnecessary to decide the separate alleged Urban Land Ceiling Act bar. The concurrent rejection of delivery of possession was likewise sustained. (¶¶ 17, 18, 19)
- Refund could not be granted on these facts: no express refund prayer was made in the plaint, and payment of earnest money itself had not been proved. Granting refund would contradict the sustained factual findings. (¶ 20)
Result
Both appeals dismissed with costs; specific performance and the request for refund refused.