Baxis Singh v. Sukhdev Singh (Dead) through LRs. & Ors.
Background
Baxis Singh sued for specific performance of a 1996 agreement under which he claimed to have purchased agricultural land from a woman (defendant No. 1) through her general attorney. A second defendant, Sukhdev Singh, claimed he actually owned and possessed the land under a registered will executed by his late father, and that separate revenue-court proceedings had already confirmed his title and possession. The Rajasthan High Court had partly allowed Baxis Singh's appeal, denying specific performance but ordering defendant No. 1 to refund the sale consideration with interest.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's finding that Sukhdev Singh was the true owner and was in possession of the land based on the will and prior revenue-court orders in his favour, which had not been disturbed in any other proceeding. Since Baxis Singh's claim to purchase the land depended on the seller actually owning it, and the seller did not, specific performance could not be granted; the High Court was right to limit relief to a refund with interest instead. Having reached this conclusion, the Court found it unnecessary to examine the parties' other arguments. The appeal was accordingly dismissed, with each side bearing its own costs.
Lesson Learnt
A buyer cannot obtain specific performance (forcing a sale through) when the seller's own title to the property is itself disputed and ultimately found to belong to someone else; in such cases the remedy is typically limited to recovery of money paid, not transfer of the property.