As laid down in Man Kaur (dead) by LRs v.
Hartar Singh Sangha (2010) 10 SCC 512, there must be a valid
contract; that defendant committed breach of
and readiness and willingness of the plaintiff to
perform his part of contract. {Para 30}
31. In present case, all the three essentials are
present. However, the suit was dismissed for
lack of title in favour of the Respondent. No
issues or points for determination were framed
for the same. Appellant at no point was given an
opportunity to lead evidence on the same. In the
absence of any issues, and especially in the
absence of any pleading contesting title of the
Respondent, the Appellant could not be
expected to prove such title in a suit for specific
performance of Agreement to sell. Therefore,
omission to frame issues has caused prejudice
to the Appellant.
32. Hence, the judgment and decree passed by the
trial court does not fulfil the requirements of a
judgment as provided for under the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908. The judgments and decree of
both the courts below are, therefore, not in
accordance with law and thus, set-aside.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026
PRAMOD SHROFF Vs MOHAN SINGH CHOPRA
AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, J.
Citation: 2026 INSC 378
Print Page