#Specific Relief Act 1963

The Gujarat High Court affirmed that a trial court may invoke Section 151 CPC to return possession to a lessee who has been unlawfully dispossessed while the underlying suit is pending. It clarified that even a mis-stated statutory citation does not defeat the court’s inherent jurisdiction. This ruling safeguards lessees’ rights to possession during protracted litigation.

Karnataka High Court rules that joint development agreements lacking precise specifications fail the 'readiness and willingness' test under Section 14(3)(c) of the Specific Relief Act, rendering them unenforceable. Developers risk forfeiture of security deposits if terms are not clearly defined, reinforcing strict compliance for contract enforcement.

Bombay High Court reinforces that a declaration suit under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act cannot be converted into a conveyance decree without an explicit prayer for specific performance. The ruling underscores procedural compliance, protecting landowners from unintended property transfers in co-operative housing disputes.