Specific performance cannot be denied for mere delay within limitation absent waiver, acquiescence, or prejudice to the defendant

Specific performance is a discretionary remedy, but the discretion must rest on sound judicial principles and not on mere delay within limitation. A suit filed within the three-year period under Article 113 of the Limitation Act cannot be rejected only because the plaintiff approached the court late. Refusal is justified only where the plaintiff's conduct amounts to waiver, abandonment, acquiescence, or has prejudiced the defendant by inducing a detrimental change of position. On the stated facts, the plaintiff explained the delay and the defendant showed no such prejudice, so specific performance was granted.

---

---

Issues: Whether the plaintiff was entitled to specific performance of the agreement to sell despite delay in instituting the suit and the surrounding circumstances of conduct.

Analysis: Relief of specific performance is discretionary under Section 22 of the Specific Relief Act, but the discretion must be exercised on sound and reasonable judicial principles and not arbitrarily. Since Article 113 of the Limitation Act prescribes a three-year period for a suit for specific performance, mere delay within limitation cannot by itself justify refusal of relief. The Indian law does not treat mere delay as equivalent to waiver or abandonment, though conduct amounting to waiver, acquiescence, or a situation where the defendant is prejudiced by the plaintiff's conduct may justify refusal. On the facts found, the plaintiff had explained the delay, and the defendant had not shown that he was induced by the plaintiff's conduct to alter his position to his detriment.

Conclusion: The plaintiff was entitled to specific performance, and the refusal of that relief by the trial court was rightly reversed.

Final Conclusion: Mere delay in bringing a suit for specific performance, without prejudicial conduct amounting to waiver, abandonment, or acquiescence, does not by itself defeat the claim where the suit is within limitation.

Ratio Decidendi: In India, a court cannot refuse specific performance solely on the ground of delay within limitation; refusal requires conduct of the plaintiff that amounts to waiver, abandonment, acquiescence, or such prejudice to the defendant as makes enforcement inequitable.

---