Specific Relief Act — Part 1 MCQs with Explanations

Necessary party : This refers to a party whose presence is essential for the court to adjudicate all the issues involved in the case completely and effectively. However, being a necessary party is not specifically related to claiming specific performance. Proper party : This refers to a party who has a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of the suit. In the context of specific performance, the applicant must be a proper party who has a legal right or interest in the contract being enforced. Neither (A) nor (B) : This option is incorrect because the applicant must be a proper party to claim specific performance. Both (A) and (C) : This option is incorrect as it suggests that the applicant must be a necessary party, which is not a requirement for claiming specific performance. Therefore, a suit for specific performance is claimed when the applicant is a proper party .

Specific performance is a remedy granted by the court to enforce the terms of a contract when monetary compensation is inadequate. However, there are certain grounds on which the court may refuse to grant specific performance. The grounds mentioned in Option A, Option C, and Option D indicate situations where the contract is unfair, inequitable, or would cause hardship to the defendant. In such cases, the court may refuse to grant specific performance. However, Option B states that the contract is not enforceable at the instance of the other party, which means the plaintiff has the right to enforce it. The court shall not refuse specific performance on this ground.

Rescission of contracts refers to the cancellation of a contract, returning the parties to the positions they were in before the contract was made. Rescission may be allowed if: Where the contract is voidable at the instance of the plaintiff: This means that if the contract can be voided by the plaintiff, rescission can be sought. This typically happens in cases of misrepresentation, fraud, undue influence, or mistake. Option B: When the contract is void, rescission is generally not required because a void contract is already considered legally unenforceable. Option C: If a third party acquires an interest in the contract in good faith, rescission may not be allowed to protect the third party's rights. Therefore, the correct answer is Option A: Where the contract is voidable at the instance of the plaintiff .

Section 11 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 , provides for the specific performance of a part of the contract . This means that under certain circumstances, a party to a contract may seek the enforcement of the performance of a specific part or portion of the contract, rather than the entire contract. For example, if a contract involves multiple obligations, and one party fulfills their part while the other party fails to perform a specific portion of the contract, the aggrieved party may seek specific performance of that particular portion while seeking other remedies for the remaining obligations. Option B: Specific performance of contracts connected with trusts , Option C: Defences respecting suits for relief based on contract , and Option D: Circumstances in which specific performance of a contract is enforceable are not the specific content provided by Section 11 of the Specific Relief Act. Given the options provided, the correct answer is Option A: Specific performance of a part of the contract.

Under Section 10 of the Specific Relief Act, the following types of contracts can be specifically enforced: Contract to get objects of historic value: Contracts involving objects of special value or historic significance can be specifically enforced because their unique nature makes monetary compensation inadequate. Option A: Contingent contracts depend on the occurrence of a future event, making them generally unsuitable for specific enforcement. Option B: Contracts to form partnerships are often based on personal relationships and mutual trust, which makes specific enforcement impractical. Option D: Marriage contracts are typically not specifically enforced due to the personal nature of marriage and individual rights. Therefore, the correct answer is Option C: Contract to get objects of historic value .

Relief of rescission refers to the cancellation of a contract, restoring the parties to the positions they held before the agreement. According to the Specific Relief Act , rescission is typically granted in cases where a contract is voidable at the option of one of the parties due to reasons like misrepresentation, fraud, undue influence, or coercion. Voidable contracts are valid and enforceable unless rescinded by the aggrieved party. Rescission gives that party a legal way to cancel the contract. Void contracts are those that are invalid from the beginning and do not need rescission, as they have no legal effect. Therefore, relief of rescission is granted specifically in the case of voidable contracts.

Section 10 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with the specific enforcement of contracts in cases where damages are not an adequate remedy. Chattel of special value refers to a movable property that holds unique importance, making monetary compensation insufficient. In such cases, courts may order specific performance to ensure the party receives the exact item rather than compensation. Why Not the Other Options? Option A: Contingent contract – These contracts depend on a future uncertain event, making them unenforceable under specific performance until the condition is met. Option B: Formation of a partnership – The law does not enforce contracts requiring personal skills or mutual trust as specific performance, since forcing unwilling parties into partnership is impractical. Option D: Deeds of separation – These agreements relate to personal relationships and are not enforceable under specific performance as they involve personal obligations. Thus, Chattel of special value is the correct answer as it meets the requirement for specific enforcement under Section 10.

First, what is a perpetual injunction ? It's a court order that permanently stops someone from doing something. Now, let's look at the options: Option A: The defendant is not a trustee of property for the plaintiff. This isn't directly related to when a perpetual injunction is usually granted. Trust relationships are usually covered in other clauses. Option B: There exists a standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused. If we *can* easily figure out the exact financial damage, courts often prefer to award compensation (money) instead of a permanent ban (injunction). So, this would *not* be a good reason for a perpetual injunction. Option C: Compensation would afford an adequate remedy. This is similar to Option B. If money can fix the problem, the court likely won't issue a perpetual injunction . Option D: It is necessary to prevent multiplicity of proceedings. This means that without the injunction, there will be a lot of cases for the same subject matter in court one after the other. This *is* a valid reason for a perpetual injunction because it saves time and resources for everyone. The court doesn't want to deal with same problem again and again. Therefore, the correct answer is Option D: It is necessary to prevent multiplicity of proceedings .

In accordance with the principles of equity and trust law, a trustee holds a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the beneficiaries and to administer the trust property in accordance with the terms of the trust deed or applicable law. If a trustee enters into a contract that exceeds their powers or breaches their fiduciary duties, it is considered a breach of trust. Under the Specific Relief Act, which governs the specific performance of contracts, a contract made by a trustee in excess of their powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. This means that if a trustee enters into such a contract, the beneficiaries or other affected parties cannot compel the trustee to carry out the contract through specific performance. Therefore, the statement "A contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced" is true (Option A).

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

Section 37 is the correct answer to “Which section of the Specific Relief Act provides for grant of temporary and permanent injunctions:”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Can be granted without notice to and hearing the defendant is the correct answer to “Which of the following statements is wrong? Perpetual injunction”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Perpetual injunction cannot be granted is the correct answer to “Section 41 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 mentions the cases in which”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Under Section 40 of the Specific Relief Act is the correct answer to “A claim for damages in a suit for injunction can be laid down”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

No is the correct answer to “A pledged certain jewel with B. On a complaint by C, the police seized the jewels and deposited them in the Court. Can they recover the jewels by filing a suit under Section 7 of the Specific Relief Act”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Finally settles the mutual rights of the parties & directs a party for all time to do or obtain from doing a thing is the correct answer to “Which is incorrect of temporary injunctions”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

The vendor may apply in the same suit in which the decree is made, to have the contract rescinded is the correct answer to “Where a decree for specific performance of a contract for sale of immovable property has been made and the purchaser within the period allowed by the court does not pay the purchase money which the court has ordered him to pay:”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

When compensation in money would be adequate relief for the loss of the thing claimed is the correct answer to “Under Section 8 of the Specific Relief Act, a person, shall not be entitled to specific relief of the delivery of a movable property, in which of the following cases”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Section 12 is the correct answer to “Specific performance of a part of the contract, has been dealt with under which Section of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 -”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

If there is a mutual mistake of the parties is the correct answer to “Under Section 26 of Specific Relief Act, the Court may direct to rectify an instrument so as to express the real intention of the parties”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Out of question is the correct answer to “In case of cancellation under section 31 the relief of specific performance”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

All the above is the correct answer to “Rescission cannot be granted”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Specific performance of contracts connected with trusts is the correct answer to “Section 11 of the Specific Relief Act, 1930 provides for”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Financial ability of plaintiff is the correct answer to “Readiness may mean capacity of plaintiff to perform contract which includes”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

A contact for which is in its nature determinable is the correct answer to “Specific Relief Act: Which of the following contracts cannot be specifically enforced”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Where the contract comprises an affirmative agreement to do a certain act, coupled with a negative agreement not to do a certain act is the correct answer to “A Court is empowered to grant in injunction to perform the negative agreement:”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Bars the plaintiff to sue for damages for the breach for which the injunction was sought is the correct answer to “Dismissal of the suit of the plaintiff seeking injunction by virtue of section 40 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Specific performance of part of contract is the correct answer to “Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act deals with:”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

After the expiry of six months from the date of dispossession is the correct answer to “Under section 6 of the Specific Relief Act suit by person dispossessed of immovable property shall not be brought”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Section 26 is the correct answer to “Any instrument may be rectified under the Specific Relief Act, 1963 in”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

The contract gives the plaintiff an unfair advantage over the defendant is the correct answer to “A Court may not exercise its discretion to decree specific performance of a contract when”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

6 months of dispossession is the correct answer to “Under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, a suit for possession of an immovable property can be filed within:”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Against a person who has possession or control over the article is the correct answer to “Section 8 of the Specific Relief Act can be invoked:”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Whereby an interest in the property is devolved by a will is the correct answer to “An instrument is not "settlement" under the Specific Relief Act”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

All the above is the correct answer to “A declaration made is binding on”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

The performance of the contract would involve hardship on the defendant which he did not foresee and non-performance would involve no such hardship on the plaintiff is the correct answer to “A court may deny specific performance of an agreement to sell an immovable property if”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Is opposite of specific performance is the correct answer to “Remedy of rescission of contract”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

None of the above is the correct answer to “Under section 10 of Specific Relief Act, the specific performance of the contract shall be enforced”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Puran Singh case is the correct answer to “In which case did the Supreme court lay down the test which may be adopted as a working rule for determining the attributes of settled possession”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.

Will dismiss the suit as plaintiffs are in a position to claim consequential relief of possession is the correct answer to “A, B and C are coparceners, A is in separate possession of joint family property. He sells it to D and puts D in possession. B and C sue for declaration of title that the property is joint family property. The Court”. This question is standard in competitive examination syllabi for Specific Relief Act.