Supreme Court on Monday (November 10) delivered a significant ruling interpreting the Specific Relief Act, 1963, holding that a party cannot unilaterally terminate a non-determinable agreement to sell, except where the contract itself is expressly

The Supreme Court on Monday (November 10) delivered a significant ruling interpreting the Specific Relief Act, 1963, holding that a party cannot unilaterally terminate a non-determinable agreement to sell, except where the contract itself is expressly determinable in nature under Section 14 of the Act. The Court further clarified that such invalid termination does not oblige the aggrieved party to first seek a separate declaration challenging the termination before pursuing a claim for specific performance.

Also Read – Supreme Court Daily Round-Up : November 11, 2025
“Unilateral termination of the agreement to sell by one party is impermissible in law, except in cases where the agreement itself is determinable in nature…If such unilateral termination of a non-determinable agreement to sell is permitted as a defence, then virtually every suit for specific performance can be frustrated by the defendant by placing an unfair burden on the plaintiff… who, despite performing his part of the obligations and hav