https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460848 A later suit for specific performance was barred by Order 2 Rule 2 CPC where the relief was available on the facts pleaded in the earlier suit, both plaints arose from the same agreement and dispute, and the claimant could not split causes of action into piecemeal litigation. The agreement was also unenforceable at inception because the property was subject to the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978, and a contract void when made cannot be revived by later exemption or subsequent developments. On both grounds, the plaint was liable to rejection and specific performance could not be decreed. en-us Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 22 Aug 2025 10:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460848 A later suit for specific performance was barred by Order 2 Rule 2 CPC where the relief was available on the facts pleaded in the earlier suit, both plaints arose from the same agreement and dispute, and the claimant could not split causes of action into piecemeal litigation. The agreement was also unenforceable at inception because the property was subject to the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978, and a contract void when made cannot be revived by later exemption or subsequent developments. On both grounds, the plaint was liable to rejection and specific performance could not be decreed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 10 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460848