Section 10: Specific Performance in Respect of Contracts • This section states that the specific

performance of a contract can be enforced by the court, subject to the provisions contained in sub-
section (2) of section 11, section 14, and section 16. • It means that if someone breaches a contract, the
other party can seek specific performance, which is a court order that requires the breaching party to
fulfill their contractual obligations. • However, the specific performance of a contract is subject to
certain provisions in the law, as mentioned in the section. Section 11: Cases in Which Specific
Performance of Contracts Connected with Trusts Enforceable • This section explains that specific
performance of a contract shall be enforced when the act agreed to be done is in the performance
wholly or partly of a trust, except as otherwise provided in this act. • It means that if a contract is
connected to a trust, the court can enforce specific performance of the contract, subject to the
provisions of this act. • However, if a trustee makes a contract in excess of their powers or in breach of
trust, that contract cannot be specifically enforced.

Section 14 of the Indian Specific Relief Act, 1963 lists the types of contracts that cannot be specifically
enforced, • which means that a court cannot force the parties to carry out the specific terms of the
contract. Here are the explanations of each point: • If one party has obtained substituted performance
of the contract in accordance with section 20 of the Act, the contract cannot be specifically enforced.
Section 20 allows a party to obtain performance of the contract by someone other than the other party,
and the cost of such performance is then recovered from the other party. For example, if A has agreed
to sell his car to B, but later refuses to do so, B can obtain substituted performance of the contract by
buying a similar car and recovering the cost from A. Once substituted performance has been obtained,
the contract cannot be specifically enforced. • If the performance of the contract involves a continuous
duty that the court cannot supervise, then the contract cannot be specifically enforced. This means that
if the court cannot monitor or oversee the performance of the contract on an ongoing basis, then it
cannot force the parties to perform it. For example, if A agrees to teach B a particular skill over a period
of time, but there is no way for the court to monitor whether A is actually teaching B, then the contract
cannot be specifically enforced. • If the contract is so dependent on the personal qualifications of the
parties that the court cannot enforce specific performance of its material terms, then the contract
cannot be specifically enforced. This means that if the contract is so specific to the abilities, expertise or
qualifications of the parties that the court cannot force them to perform it. For example, if A agrees to
paint a portrait of B, but A is the only artist with the skill to paint that particular style of portrait, the
court cannot force A to perform the contract, as it is too specific to A's personal abilities. • If the
contract is in its nature determinable, then it cannot be specifically enforced. A determinable contract is
one where the parties have agreed to a certain course of action but have also included provisions for its
termination. For example, if A agrees to lease a property to B for a period of one year, but includes a
clause that the lease will be terminated if A decides to sell the property, then the contract is
determinable and cannot be specifically enforced.

Section 16: Personal bars to relief • This section lays down the conditions under which specific
performance of a contract cannot be enforced. • If a person has obtained a substituted performance of
the contract under Section 20, they cannot claim specific performance. • If a person becomes incapable
of performing their part of the contract, violates any essential term of the contract, acts in fraud of the
contract, or acts in a manner that subverts the relationship intended to be established by the contract,
then they cannot claim specific performance. • Additionally, if a person has failed to prove that they
have performed or are ready and willing to perform the essential terms of the contract which are to be
performed by them, except the terms prevented or waived by the defendant, they cannot claim specific
performance

RECTIFICATION (SECTION 26) Section 26 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 addresses the rectification of
contracts or other written instruments in cases where the expressed terms do not reflect the real
intention of the parties due to fraud or mutual mistake. The section outlines the following provisions: •
Parties' Remedies: Either party or their representative can initiate a lawsuit to rectify the instrument, or
the plaintiff can include a claim for rectification in a suit where the rights arising from the instrument are
in question. Additionally, a defendant in such a suit can request rectification as a defense. • Court's
Discretion: If the court finds, in a suit seeking rectification, that the instrument fails to express the true
intention of the parties due to fraud or mistake, it can exercise its discretion to direct the rectification of
the instrument to align with their actual intention. However, this rectification should not prejudice the
rights of third parties who have acquired rights in good faith and for value. • Rectification and Specific
Performance: A written contract that has been rectified, upon the prayer of the party seeking
rectification in their pleading and at the discretion of the court, may subsequently be specifically
enforced. • Claim Requirement: No relief for rectification can be granted unless it has been specifically
claimed by the party. However, the court has the authority to allow the amendment of the pleading to
include such a claim at any stage of the proceeding if it deems it just to do so. Section 26 provides a legal
recourse for parties to rectify written instruments when their true intentions have been misrepresented
due to fraud or mutual mistake. By allowing for rectification and subsequent enforcement, the section
aims to uphold the integrity and fairness of contractual agreements.

RESCISSION (SECTIONS 27-30) Section 27 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with the circumstances in
which a contract may be rescinded or refused to be rescinded. The section provides the following
provisions: • Grounds for Rescission: Any person with a vested interest in a contract can sue for its
rescission. The court may adjudicate the rescission of the contract in the following cases: o The contract
is voidable or terminable by the plaintiff. o The contract is unlawful for reasons not apparent on its face,
and the defendant is more responsible for the unlawfulness than the plaintiff. • Grounds for Refusal of
Rescission: Notwithstanding the provisions in sub-section (1), the court may refuse to rescind the
contract in the following situations: o The plaintiff has expressly or implicitly ratified the contract. o Due
to circumstances that have occurred since the contract was made (not due to any act of the defendant),
the parties cannot be substantially restored to their original positions. o Third parties have acquired
rights in good faith and for value during the existence of the contract. o Only a part of the contract is
sought to be rescinded, and such part is inseparable from the rest of the contract. Section 28 addresses
the rescission of contracts for the sale or lease of immovable property when a decree for specific
performance has been granted but the purchaser or lessee fails to pay the required amount within the
specified time. The provisions state that the vendor or lessor may apply for rescission of the contract,
either partially or entirely, and the court may order such rescission as it deems just. The court may also
direct the restoration of possession to the vendor or lessor and the payment of accrued rents and
profits. If the purchaser or lessee pays the required amount within the given period, the court may
award further relief, including the execution of a conveyance or lease and delivery of possession. Section
29 allows a plaintiff in a suit for specific performance to pray alternatively for rescission and cancellation
of the contract if specific enforcement is not possible. If the court refuses to enforce the contract
specifically, it may order the contract to be rescinded and delivered up for cancellation. Section 30
empowers the court, upon granting rescission of a contract, to require the party receiving such relief to
restore any benefit received from the other party and make any compensation deemed just by the
court. These sections provide a legal framework for the rescission of contracts and outline the
circumstances under which rescission may be granted or refused. The court's discretion plays a
significant role in determining whether rescission is appropriate and the subsequent equitable actions to
be taken.

CANCELLATION ((SECTIONS 31-33) Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with the
circumstances in which cancellation of a written instrument may be ordered. The section provides the
following provisions: • Grounds for Cancellation: Any person against whom a written instrument is void
or voidable, and who has reasonable apprehension that the instrument, if left outstanding, may cause
serious injury, may file a lawsuit seeking to have the instrument declared void or voidable. The court has
the discretion to adjudicate the instrument as void or voidable and order its delivery and cancellation. •
Effect on Registered Instruments: If the instrument has been registered under the Indian Registration
Act, 1908, the court must send a copy of its decree to the officer in whose office the instrument has
been registered. The officer will then note the cancellation of the instrument in their records. Section 32
states that in cases where an instrument is evidence of different rights or obligations, the court may, in
an appropriate situation, partially cancel the instrument and allow it to remain valid for the remaining
parts. Section 33 deals with the power of the court to require the restoration of benefits or
compensation when an instrument is cancelled or successfully resisted as void or voidable. •
Cancellation of Instrument: When an instrument is cancelled by the court, the court may require the
party receiving relief to restore any benefit received from the other party and make any compensation
as deemed just by the court. • Successful Resistance: If a defendant successfully resists a suit on the
ground that the instrument sought to be enforced against them is voidable or that the agreement
sought to be enforced is void due to their incapacity to contract, the court may require the defendant to
restore any benefit received under the instrument or agreement to the other party, to the extent that
they have benefited from it. These sections provide the legal framework for the cancellation of written
instruments. They allow individuals to seek the cancellation of void or voidable instruments that may
cause them harm, and provide the court with the power to order the delivery, cancellation, and
restoration of benefits or compensation

DECLARATORY DECREE (SECTIONS 34-35) Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with the
discretion of the court regarding the declaration of status or right. The section provides the following
provisions: • Right to Institute Suit: Any person who is entitled to a legal character or a right to any
property can file a lawsuit against any person who denies or has an interest in denying their title to such
character or right. • Court's Discretion: The court, in its discretion, may make a declaration in the suit
stating that the plaintiff is entitled to the claimed character or right. The plaintiff is not required to seek
any further relief in such a suit. • Limitation on Court's Power: However, the court cannot make a
declaration if the plaintiff is capable of seeking further relief beyond a mere declaration of title but
chooses not to do so. Explanation: The section further explains that a trustee of property is considered a
"person interested to deny" a title adverse to the title of someone who is not in existence, and for
whom, if they were in existence, the trustee would act as a trustee. Section 35 states the effect of a
declaration made under this chapter. The declaration is binding only on the parties involved in the suit
and persons claiming through them. If any of the parties are trustees, the declaration is also binding on
the persons for whom they would act as trustees if those persons were in existence at the time of the
declaration. In summary, these sections provide a mechanism for individuals to seek a declaration of
their legal character or right to property. The court has the discretion to make such a declaration, and
once made, it is binding on the parties to the suit and those claiming through them. However, the
declaration does not extend its binding effect beyond the parties and their successors unless the parties
involved are trustees, in which case it also affects the beneficiaries of the trust.

INJUNCTIONS (SECTIONS 37-42) Chapter VII of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, deals with injunctions as a
form of preventive relief. Here are the key provisions: 36. Grant of Preventive Relief: Preventive relief, in
the form of injunctions, either temporary or perpetual, can be granted at the discretion of the court. 37.
Temporary and Perpetual Injunctions: • Temporary injunctions are granted for a specific period or until
further orders from the court. They can be granted at any stage of a suit and are governed by the Code
of Civil Procedure, 1908. • Perpetual injunctions can only be granted through a decree made at the final
hearing of the suit. They permanently restrain the defendant from asserting a right or committing an act
that would infringe upon the plaintiff's rights. Perpetual Injunctions: 38. Granting of Perpetual
Injunctions: • A perpetual injunction may be granted to the plaintiff to prevent the breach of an
obligation existing in their favour, whether expressly or implied. • In cases where the obligation arises
from a contract, the court follows the rules and provisions contained in Chapter II of the Specific Relief
Act. • When the defendant invades or threatens to invade the plaintiff's property rights or enjoyment, a
perpetual injunction may be granted in certain situations: • If the defendant is a trustee of the property
for the plaintiff. • When there is no standard for determining the actual or potential damages caused by
the invasion. • When monetary compensation would not provide adequate relief. • When the injunction
is necessary to prevent multiple legal proceedings. 39. Mandatory Injunctions: When necessary to
prevent a breach of an obligation, the court may grant an injunction that compels the performance of
specific acts enforceable by the court. NOTES BY AJITABH MISHRA NOTES BY AJITABH MISHRA 22 40.
Damages in Addition to or in lieu of Injunction: In a suit for perpetual or mandatory injunction, the
plaintiff can claim damages in addition to or instead of an injunction. The court has the discretion to
award such damages, provided that the relief has been claimed in the plaint. 41. Grounds for Refusing
an Injunction: The court cannot grant an injunction in certain circumstances, including when: • It
restrains a person from pursuing a judicial proceeding already pending, except to prevent multiple
proceedings. • It restrains a person from initiating or continuing proceedings in a court not subordinate
to the court where the injunction is sought. • It restrains a person from applying to any legislative body.
• It restrains a person from initiating or continuing proceedings in a criminal matter. • It aims to prevent
the breach of a contract that cannot be specifically enforced. • It is based on the allegation of nuisance
without clarity that the act will be a nuisance. • The plaintiff has acquiesced in a continuing breach. •
There are other equally effective modes of obtaining relief, except in cases of breach of trust. • It would
impede or delay an infrastructure project or interfere with the provision of related facilities or services.
• The conduct of the plaintiff or their agents disqualifies them from receiving assistance from the court.
• The plaintiff has no personal interest in the matter. 42. Injunction to Perform Negative Agreement:
Even if specific performance of an affirmative agreement in a contract is not possible, the court can
grant an injunction to enforce a negative agreement associated with the contract, provided that the
plaintiff has not failed to perform their obligations. These provisions outline the framework for granting
injunctions, both temporary and perpetual, as preventive relief in civil suits. The court has discretionary
powers to determine whether to grant an injunction based on the circumstances of each case.