Contract
rajendran
(Querist) 13 October 2012
This query is : Resolved
A entered contract with B to purchase the house which belongs to B. As per the agreement the sale price is 20,00,000/- and B received The advance amount Rs. 2,00,000/- from A the Agreement Period is 6 months. But B was refuse to receive more amount to registered the house. A prefer the Police complaint against A. At the time of inquiry
A agreed to return the advance amount and B was also accepted for the same. A given cheque for the above said advance amount to B but the cheque was returned as 'INSUFFICIENT FUNDS'. B field a suit for specific Performance but it was dismissed. In the judgement Hon'ble Judge stating that When B received the cheque from A the contracts come to end and there is no cause action of suit for specific Performance. My Argument is when the cheque was returned as funds insfficient the cantract is in force. Whether is correct or not? Is any alternative for the same.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 13 October 2012
what were the terms and conditions of the contract ? the conseqences for refusal to accept balance consoideration .
since court has dismissed your suit of specifi performance on the ground that once earnest money is returned contract comes to an end your remedy would be to file summary suit for recovery of earnest money of rs 2 lakhs .
Guest
(Expert) 13 October 2012
Dear Rajenderan,
You have probably confused your query. While, A is buyer and B as the seller. B receives advance and does not accept additional amount, but you stated, "A prefer the Police complaint against A." It is not understood, how A can lodge a police complaint against himself?
Further, you stated A returned advance amount and gave cheque, while B had received advance. How, what for A returned the advance to B and issued cheque and for what amount?
Still further, you have stated that B filed a suit for specific performance, while you have not stated whether B was ready to transfer of property to A or not, or what type of specific performance he desired from A?
You have also not stated how B tried to justify case for specific performance, whicle the case pertained to cheque bouncing on account of insufficient funds.
So, in such type of confusions, and the information about real base of the case, it is not possible to give some specific opinion, whether the contract came to end or not, and whether there was any cause action of suit for specific Performance or not.
To me, the case seems to have taken a wrong track right from its beginning.
