Summary
Land subject to a decree for specific performance was compulsorily acquired during second appeal. Although acquisition prevented specific performance, a mere refund of the paid price was inadequate. The Court substituted compensation of ten lakh rupees for the purchasers’ heirs from the acquisition proceeds and directed payment of the balance to the original owners.
Issues
- What substitute relief should follow when compulsory acquisition prevents enforcement of an otherwise established right to specific performance.
Provisions considered
- Section 21, Specific Relief Act, 1963Its power to award substitute compensation survives supervening impossibility without the plaintiff’s fault; acquisition compensation informed the relief. (¶¶ 11–13, 16)
Held
- Acquisition meant that the decree for specific performance could not be maintained, but section 21 permitted substitute compensation; the issue was the appropriate alternative relief rather than reversal of the established contractual entitlement. (¶ 9–13)
- The gift deed in the deity’s favour had been declared void, so the deity had no right to retain compensation merely because its name appeared in the revenue record. (¶ 15)
- On the overall facts, ten lakh rupees from the land-acquisition compensation was awarded to the plaintiffs’ heirs; the remainder of the land-and-shops compensation belonged to the original landowners. The same allocation governed disbursement or repayment by the deity if it had already received the proceeds. (¶ 16)
Result
Appeal allowed to the stated extent; High Court decree modified to award Rs.10 lakh to the plaintiffs’ heirs from the acquisition proceeds, with the balance to the original owners and corresponding disbursement or repayment directions.