The Patna High Court has modified a trial court decree in a long-running property transaction dispute, holding that the buyer failed to perform a key obligation under the sale agreement. As a result, the Court reduced the amount recoverable by the buyer and removed the compensation awarded earlier.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from an agreement dated 23 August 2010 for the sale of a residential property in Patna for a total consideration of ₹1.55 crore. Umesh Kumar Sahu, the purchaser, claimed that he had paid ₹43.30 lakh and remained ready to complete the transaction. He sought execution of the sale deed or, alternatively, a refund of the amount paid with interest.
The seller, Purusottam Swaroop, disputed the claim and argued that the purchaser had failed to make payments as required under the agreement.
Court’s Observations
Justice Jitendra Kumar examined the terms of the agreement and noted that the purchaser was required to pay an additional ₹25 lakh within four months of execution of the contract.
The Court observed,
“There is no pleading or evidence, whatsoever, that he paid Rs.25,00,000/- to the Defendant/Appellant or he was willing and ready pay this amount.”
Referring to Section 16 of the Specific Relief Act, the Court held that a party seeking enforcement of a contract must prove readiness and willingness to perform its obligations. Since the purchaser failed to establish this requirement, he could not seek specific performance of the agreement.
The Court also found that the agreement itself allowed the seller to deduct 10% of the advance amount if the purchaser defaulted.
Decision
Setting aside the trial court’s order, the High Court held that the buyer was entitled only to the amount remaining after a 10% deduction from ₹43.30 lakh.
Accordingly, the Court directed the seller to pay ₹38.97 lakh along with interest at 6% per annum from 23 December 2010 within two months. The Court further ruled that if payment is not made within the stipulated period, penal interest at 12% per annum would become payable.
The Court also removed the trial court’s direction requiring payment of ₹5 lakh as compensation and partly allowed the appeal.
Case Details:
Case Title: Purusottam Swaroop v. Umesh Kumar Sahu
Case Number: First Appeal No. 67 of 2017
Judge: Justice Jitendra Kumar
Decision Date: 15 June 2026
