What is part performance of specific contract as per S 12 of the Specific Relief Act?

 Part performance in the Specific Relief Act means specific performance of only a part of the contract, and the general rule is that the court does not order performance of a part alone. Section 12 is the key provision, and it allows exceptions where the unperformed part is small and compensable, or in some cases where the plaintiff is willing to accept partial performance and relinquish the remaining claim and compensation.

30 second answer

“As a general rule, the court does not grant specific performance of part of a contract under Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act. However, it may be granted in exceptional cases—such as where the part left unperformed is small and can be compensated in money, or where the plaintiff accepts the part that can be performed and gives up the rest along with compensation claims. If the contract has separable parts, the part which is independent and specifically enforceable may also be enforced.”

One-line framing

 “Rule—no part performance; exception—allowed only in limited statutory situations under Section 12 of Specific relief Act.”

Quick recall points

• General rule: no specific performance of part of a contract.

• Exception: small unperformed portion, capable of money compensation.

• Exception: substantial part may still be enforced if the plaintiff relinquishes the rest and compensation claim, subject to statutory conditions.

• Exception: separable and independent part of the contract may be specifically enforced.

Section 12(3) Specific Relief Act: Supreme Court Clarifies That Relinquishment May Be Made Even At Appellate Stage

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed an important principle governing specific performance of part of a contract under Section 12(3) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963: the plaintiff’s relinquishment of claims regarding the unperformable part of the contract and of compensation can be made at any stage of the litigation, including at the appellate stage. In Vijay Prabhu v. S.T. Lajapathie & Ors., 2025 INSC 52, the Court held that such a claim cannot be rejected merely because the relinquishment was not made before the Trial Court or was not expressly incorporated in the plaint.

This ruling is significant because objections in specific performance suits often turn on pleading technicalities. The Supreme Court clarified that, for the purposes of Section 12(3), the timing of relinquishment is not by itself fatal, so long as the statutory conditions for grant of partial specific performance are otherwise met.

Print Page