AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
It is now contended by Mr. Naryanamurthi that the applicability of the doctrine of part performance is limited to cases where the right to sue for
specific performance is not barred on the date of the subsequent suit and he relies en Gazendranath Dey v. Moulvi Ashraf Hossain (1922) 27
C.W.N. 159 and Shy am Kishore v. Dineschandra (1919) 31 C.L.J. 75.
In neither case was this question specifically considered whereas in Mehar Ali Khan v. Aratunnessa Bibi (1919) 25 C.W.N. 905 there is a
decision of a single Judge to the contrary. We can find no such limitation in any of the judgments of the Privy Council cited, and to impose such a
limitation would in effect, confine the equity to cases in which the party had a subsisting legal right, which he could enforce, and consequently be a
denial of justice in other cases. This is hardly consistent with the doctrines of equity and we are not prepared to accept this plea.
In the result this appeal is allowed and plaintiff''s suit dismissed with costs throughout.