Rakesh Malhotra v. Kamaljit Singh Sandhu & Ors.
Background
The appellant claimed he had agreed in 1987 to buy a plot in Gurgaon from the original owner (defendant no. 1) and had paid the price and taken possession, but the sale deed was never formally executed. In 2002 the original owner instead sold the same plot to two other people (defendants 2 and 3). The buyer sued for a declaration of ownership and injunction, but never specifically prayed for "specific performance" of the 1987 agreement in his plaint.
Decision Breakdown
The trial court only granted a partial money-recovery decree; the first appellate court granted full relief including specific performance; the High Court reversed that and restored the trial court's limited decree. The Supreme Court agreed with the High Court that specific performance could not be granted because it was never actually prayed for in the plaint, and separately held the suit (filed in 2004, 17 years after the 1987 agreement and 10 years after the 1994 sale deed in favour of defendant no. 1) was also hit by limitation. The appeal was dismissed, though the defendants voluntarily agreed to pay the original plaintiff Rs. 10,00,000 as an ex-gratia goodwill payment to end the litigation.
Lesson Learnt
A court cannot grant a specific relief (like specific performance of a sale agreement) unless that exact relief was actually prayed for in the lawsuit, and claims based on old, unregistered agreements can be defeated simply by waiting too long to sue.