[8] 16. Personal bars to facilitate – the specific performance of a contract can not be imposed in favor of a person – 10. Beyond a simple interpretation of section 19 of the Act, we also consider that this section is exhaustive on the question of who opposes the parties to whom a contract for a given performance may be applied. `31. However, we agree with Mr Lalit that it was not necessary, for the above purposes, for the full amount of the consideration to have been made available and for the applicant to provide evidence in that regard`. As a general rule, the order of the particular benefit is not granted where one of the following headings is as follows: `20. Discretion to order a particular benefit… (1) The jurisdiction to order a particular benefit is left to the discretion and the court is not required to grant such an exemption solely because it is legitimate to do so; but the court`s discretion is not arbitrary, but robust and reasonable, guided by judicial principles and can be corrected by a court of appeal. The defendant, in an action for the actual performance of an agreement, must prove that he was willing and willing to continuously fulfil his part of the contract between the date of the contract and the date of hearing of the appeal. `Where a sale of the same immovable property takes place for the benefit of a previous and subsequent purchaser and the subsequent purchaser has paid the purchase money to the seller as part of the transfer in his favour, an action for special provision by the previous purchaser arises, if he succeeds, the question of the correct form of the injunction in such a case arises. The practice of the courts in India was not uniform and three different ways of thinking were created.

From one point of view, the correct form of the injunction is to cancel the subsequent purchase vis-à-vis the previous buyer and the direct transfer by the seller alone. A second view is that sellers and Vendee should adhere to it, while a third would limit the execution of the transfer to the subsequent buyer. In the opinion of the Supreme Court, the appropriate form of the decree is to direct the specific performance of the contract between the seller and the previous buyer and to order the subsequent buyer to join the transfer to pay the title in him to the previous buyer. he does not subscribe to a special agreement between the previous buyer and his seller; All he does is pass on his title to the previous buyer. Section 10 of the Act as amended[4] emphasizes that a particular benefit can normally be granted and refused only in the circumstances set out in sections 11, 14 and 16 of the Act.[5] There are two types of recourse following the judgment for a given service, which each party may make use of in an appropriate case – „16. In an appeal for the specific execution of the contract for the sale of immovable property, which provides that, upon execution of the deed of sale, ownership of the property is handed over to the buyer, it is implied that the delivery of ownership of the property is part of the decree on the specific execution of the contract. . . .