Where applicant neither necessary nor proper party in suit of specific...

Home / Law / Specific Relief Act / Question

Examveda

Where applicant neither necessary nor proper party in suit of specific performance whether his presence is necessary for effective adjudication?

A. Yes

B. No

C. Conditional one

D. None of above

Answer: Option B

Solution (By Examveda Team)

Specific Performance: This is when someone asks the court to force another person to fulfill a contract (usually to buy or sell property).
Necessary Party: A person who must be included in a lawsuit because the court cannot make a proper decision without them. If they are missing, the case can't move forward.
Proper Party: A person who should be included in a lawsuit because their involvement could help the court make a better decision, but the case can still proceed without them.
Applicant: The person applying to be part of the lawsuit.

The question tells us the applicant is neither necessary nor proper. This means their presence isn't crucial for a fair and complete decision. Therefore, they don't need to be part of the suit.

Therefore, the correct answer is B: No

This Question Belongs to Law >> Specific Relief Act

Join The Discussion

Comments (1)

Mounika Gurram:

1 year ago

Explain above question

Related Questions on 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

View Answer

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

View Answer

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)

View Answer

Point out - On which of the following ground the court shall not refuse the decree of specific performance.

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

View Answer