In which of the following cases has the Supreme Court held that when granting of damages is an adequate relief, the specific performance would be refused?
A. Prakash Chandra v. Angadlal
B. Maria v. Bilkees
C. Chand rani v. Kamal rani
D. None of the above
Answer: Option A
This Question Belongs to Law >> Specific Relief Act
Which section of the Specific Relief Act provides for grant of temporary and permanent injunctions:
A. Section 35
B. Section 36
C. Section 37
D. None of the above
Which of the following statements is wrong? Perpetual injunction
A. Is granted by a decree
B. Can be granted without notice to and hearing the defendant
C. Can never be granted without notice to and hearing the defendant
D. Can be granted on merits only
Suit for specific performance is claimed when applicant is . . . . . . . . .
A. Necessary party
B. Proper party
C. Neither (A) nor (B)
D. Both (A) and (C)
A. In a contract, where plaintiff has been given an unfair advantage over the defendant
B. In a case where the contract is not enforceable at the instance of the other party
C. Where the defendant entered into the contract under circumstances which though not rendering the contract voidable, makes it inequitable to enforce specific performance
D. Where performance of the contract would involve some hardship on the defendant which he did not foresee, whereas its non-performance would involve no such hardship on the plaintiff
Join The Discussion