Specific performance of part of contract
Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with specific performance of part of contract. Except as otherwise hereinafter provided in this section, the court shall not direct the specific performance of a part of a contract. The Act came into force on 01 Mar 1964.
(1) Except as otherwise hereinafter provided in this section, the court shall not direct the specific performance of a part of a contract.
(2) Where a party to a contract is unable to perform the whole of his part of it, but the part which must be left unperformed be a only a small proportion to the whole in value and admits of compensation in money, the court may, at the suit of either party, direct the specific performance of so much of the contract as can be performed, and award compensation in money for the deficiency.
(3) Where a party to a contract is unable to perform the whole of his part of it, and the part which must be left unperformed either--
(a) forms a considerable part of the whole, though admitting of compensation in money; or
(b) does not admit of compensation in money;
he is not entitled to obtain a decree for specific performance; but the court may, at the suit of the other party, direct the party in default to perform specifically so much of his part of the contract as he can perform, if the other party--
(i) in a case falling under clause (a), [pays or has paid] the agreed consideration for the whole of the contract reduced by the consideration for the part which must be left unperformed and in a case falling under clause (b) 1pays or has paid the consideration for the whole of the contract without any abatement; and
(ii) in either case, relinquishes all claims to the performance of the remaining part of the contract and all right to compensation, either for the deficiency or for the loss or damage sustained by him through the default of the defendant.
(4) When a part of a contract which, taken by itself, can and ought to be specifically performed, stands on a separate and independent footing from another part of the same contract which cannot or ought not to be specifically performed the court may direct specific performance of the former part.
Explanation.--For the purposes of this section, a party to a contract shall be deemed to be unable to perform the whole of his part of it if a portion of its subject-matter existing at the date of the contract has ceased to exist at the time of its performance.
Section 12, The Specific Relief Act, 1963 (Act 47 of 1963).
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Raman (dead) by L. R. S vs R. Natarajan
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A court cannot grant a decree for specific performance of a contract when the performance of the contract depends upon the defendant entering into an agreement with a third party who is not bound by the original contract and whose consent cannot be compelled by the court. Where a contract comprises interdependent parts and one part cannot be specifically enforced due to dependence on a third party's will, the other part also cannot be specifically enforced under Section 12(1) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, unless the exceptions in subsections (2), (3), or (4) apply.
On this section: Section 12(1) prohibits the court from directing specific performance of a part of a contract. The Supreme Court applied this provision to hold that since the contract comprised two parts (entering into agreement with third party for pathway and executing sale deed), and the first part could not be compelled, the second part could not be specifically enforced.
-
B. Santoshamma vs D. Sarala
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When a vendor deliberately transfers part of the subject matter of a sale agreement to a third party after entering into the agreement with the vendee, and the vendee has demonstrated readiness and willingness to perform her obligations by paying a substantial portion of the consideration within the stipulated time, the court may, under Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, direct specific performance of so much of the contract as can be performed by reducing the consideration proportionally in lieu of damages. A registered deed of conveyance takes priority over an unregistered sale agreement under Section 50 of the Registration Act, 1908, and the rights of a bona fide transferee cannot be nullified in a suit for specific performance where the transferee was not impleaded as a necessary party within the period of limitation.
On this section: Permits specific performance of part of a contract when the vendor is unable to perform the whole but the unperformed part is small in proportion to the whole and admits of compensation in money. The Court applied this section to grant specific performance for 200 square yards at a reduced consideration.
-
Jaswinder Kaur (now Deceased ) through Her Lrs vs Gurmeet Singh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Specific performance of a contract cannot be decreed in part without satisfying the mandatory requirements of Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. A party seeking specific performance must prove readiness and willingness to perform the entire contract, not merely part of it. Readiness and willingness cannot be inferred merely from part payment or partial performance of consideration. Where a party's inability to perform arises from its own conduct and lack of financial capacity (evidenced by failure to produce financial documents), and where the party has failed to substantiate presence and readiness at the material time, specific performance cannot be granted either wholly or partially. The High Court's authority in a second appeal is limited to examining the legality and perversity of findings recorded by trial and first appellate courts based on evidence; it cannot create a new contract or decree what was not set up by the parties.
On this section: Provides that the court shall not direct specific performance of a part of a contract except in circumstances provided in the section itself. The High Court was found to have violated this provision by decreeing specific performance in part without satisfying the requirements of Section 12(2), 12(3), or 12(4).
-
Kammana Sambamurthy (d) by Lrs vs Kalipatnapu Atchutamma
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
When an agreement of sale is executed by a vendor for the entire property, but it later transpires that the vendor is only a co-owner and does not have full title due to a co-owner spouse's undivided share in ancestral property: (1) The agreement is binding on the vendor to the extent of his own share; (2) Specific performance can be granted for the vendor's share even if the co-owner spouse is not party to the agreement and does not consent; (3) This is not a case of partial specific performance under Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act, but rather a case of whole performance of the vendor's contract obligation to sell his own share; (4) The contract is severable between the vendor's share and the co-owner's share; (5) The vendee, after obtaining the sale deed for the vendor's share, has the right to apply for partition and get his demarcated share; (6) The non-joinder of the co-owner does not prevent enforcement of the contract against the contracting party (the vendor) to the extent of his share; (7) Doctrine of estoppel and implied authority cannot be used to bind a non-party co-owner who explicitly and timely objected to the agreement.
On this section: Examined whether the provision against partial specific performance applies. The Court held that Section 12 is not attracted because this is not a case of performance of part of the contract; rather, it is a case of whole contract performance insofar as the vendor (contracting party) is concerned. The vendor had agreed to sell his entire property, but it later turned out that he had only half share. The contract is enforceable against him for his half share as a matter of whole performance of the contract, not partial performance.
-
H. P. A. International vs Bhagwandas Fatechand Daswani
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A contract for sale of property which is contingent on obtaining court sanction for transfer of interests of non-parties (reversioners) is an integrated, indivisible, and inseparable contract. When the essential contingency (court sanction) fails to materialize despite reasonable efforts by the vendor and despite the vendor's implied obligation to seek it within reasonable time, the contract becomes unenforceable. A buyer cannot invoke Section 12(3) of the Specific Relief Act to enforce partial relief (transfer of life interest alone) when: (a) the contract terms evince clear intention that parties contemplated all-or-nothing transaction; (b) explicit contractual clause (Clause 6) provides for cancellation if sanction not obtained; (c) no stipulation in contract provides for separate transfer of life interest if sanction for reversioners' interests fails; (d) the claim for partial relief is made after unreasonable delay and substantial change of circumstances; (e) reversioners, being non-parties to the contract, cannot be bound by doctrines of estoppel or trusts to give effect to a contract to which they never agreed; and (f) doing so would adversely affect the reversioners' independent interests and create future litigation. Courts cannot grant specific performance on terms not contemplated by the original contract parties, even if buyer attempts to waive the sanctioning clause.
On this section: Permits court to grant decree for specific performance of part of contract only where (a) part forms considerable portion admitting money compensation or does not admit compensation, (b) other party pays agreed consideration reduced by unperformed part or full consideration without abatement, and (c) other party relinquishes all claims to remaining part unconditionally. Court held this section cannot be invoked where contract terms evince contrary intention to segregation.
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… In such circumstances no suit for specific performance of contract could be filed: only a suit to enforce the agreement so far as it related to the payment of the proportionate theka money could be, and has been filed. 9. The relevant portion of section 12 of the Specific Relief Act (Act 1 of 1877) reads as follows: "… The specific performance of any contract may in the discretion of the court be enforced— <span id="page-103-1"></span><span id="page-103-0"></span> | 93 See Footnote 85 | | …
-
… In such circumstances no suit for specific performance of contract could be filed: only a suit to enforce the agreement so far as it related to the payment of the proportionate theka money could be, and has been filed. 9. The relevant portion of section 12 of the Specific Relief Act (Act 1 of 1877) reads as follows: "… The specific performance of any contract may in the discretion of the court be enforced— <span id="page-103-1"></span><span id="page-103-0"></span> | 93 See Footnote 85 | | …
-
… The Vendee acquires a legitimate right to enforce specific performance of the agreement. 72. It is well settled that the Court ordinarily enforces a contract in its entirety by passing a decree for its specific performance. However, Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act carves out exceptions, where the Court might direct specific performance of a contract in part. Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is set out hereinbelow for convenience. 12. Specific performance of part of contract.- (1) Except as otherwise hereinafter provided in this …
Questions about Section 12
What have the courts held on Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act?
Raman (dead) by L. R. S vs R. Natarajan (13 Sep 2022) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Section 12(1) prohibits the court from directing specific performance of a part of a contract. The Supreme Court applied this provision to hold that since the contract comprised two parts (entering into agreement with third party for pathway and executing sale deed), and the first part could not be compelled, the second part could not be specifically enforced. Another 4 judgments on this section are set out below, all of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2004 to 2022.
How do I find court cases under Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: Specific Relief Act 12, section 12 Specific Relief Act, section 12 of the Specific Relief Act. People searching for it also type specific relief act section 12 3 and specific relief act 1877 section 12. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 5 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Raman (dead) by L. R. S vs R. Natarajan (13 Sep 2022).
When did Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act come into force?
Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act, cited as Specific Relief Act 12, came into force on 01 Mar 1964, having been enacted on 13 Dec 1963. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 28. Rescission in certain circumstances of contracts for the sale or lease of immovable property, the specific performance of which has been decreed382 words
- 15. Who may obtain specific performance330 words
- 13. Rights of purchaser or lessee against person with no title or imperfect title309 words
- 26. When instrument may be rectified292 words
- 20. Substituted performance of contract269 words
- 20A. Special provisions for contract relating to infrastructure project260 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.