Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"19. The same High Court, however. in M/s. Ex-Servicemen Enterprises (P) Ltd. v. Sumey Singh14 considered the effect of section 22 (2) with its proviso. In that case the decree did not give the plaintiff the relief of possession. The question arose:

Was the Court powerless to put him in possession of the property though he had a decree for specific performance in his favour ? The Delhi High Court observed:

"Section 22 enacts a rule of pleading. The legislature thought it will be useful to introduce a rule that in order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings the plaintiff may claim a decree for possession in a suit for specific performance even though, strictly speaking the right to possession accrues only when specific performance is decreed.. The legislature has now made a statutory provision enabling the plaintiff to ask for possession in the suit for specific performance and empowering the court to provide in the decree itself that upon payment by the plaintiff of the consideration money within the given time, the defendant should execute the deed and put the plaintiff in possession.

8.3. Crucially the aforesaid aspect of the matter was not assailed before us in the appeal. Nevertheless, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge has come to a correct conclusion in law, which is borne out from the observations made in paragraph 28 of the impugned judgment; which we have culled out in the earlier part of our judgment. The sum and substance of the discussion of the learned Single Judge, on this aspect is, that the relief of possession is embedded in the decree for specific performance, and that, in any event even at the stage of execution, the executing court is permitted to allow the amendment of the plaint for inclusion of such a relief.