Specific Relief Act, 1963

— Ss. 20 and 16 — Exercise of discretion as to grant of specific performance of contract — Proper mode of — Agreement in question if opposed to public policy — Appellants though admitting to execution of the two sale agreements concerned, alleging that the same were void and opposed to public policy since power of attorney based on which said agreements had been executed on behalf of Appellant 1 Company was contrary and opposed to its memorandum and articles of association and that the said agreements were opposed to public policy also for violating stamp and income tax laws — Sustainability — Held, evidence on record, clearly establish capacity, readiness and willingness of respondent-plaintiff to pay the balance amount — There is no evidence to show that the power-of-attorney holder was acting in an unauthorised manner in view of clear resolution of Appellant 1 Company deciding to sell the property — Hence, in light of its findings and the evidence on record impugned judgment of High Court directing specific performance of the said agreements cannot be faulted, (2006) 6 SCC 351-A

Corporate Laws

Companies Act, 1956

— Ss. 189, 12 & 26 — Resolution of Company deciding to sell certain of its property by granting power of attorney to a senior member of its management — Later, Company contending that power of attorney was invalid being opposed to memorandum and articles of association — Sustainability — Held, there is no evidence to show that the power-of-attorney holder was acting in an unauthorised manner in view of clear resolution of Appellant 1 Company deciding to sell the property, (2006) 6 SCC 351-B