Specific relief is the compliance of a contract specifically, which has been

refused to comply with.” Critically analyze the nature of the Specific Relief in
the view of the above statement.

Specific relief of a contract is an equitable remedy which aims at the exact fulfillment of an
obligation. In other words, specific relief means relief in specific , i.e. an exact or particular, a
named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood and providing relief of a
specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation
Moreover, specific relief of contract is a remedy in which party to a contract compelled to
do or omit the very act as per the terms of the contract provided by section 5 of Specific
Relief Act 1877 . The remedy of specific performance as specific relief of contract revolves
around the subject of “contract”. There can be no specific performance without a valid
contract or no contracts . Specific performance may be obtained of valid and voidable
contracts but cannot be of void contracts. The subject of contract is of main essence to the
relief of specific performance.
A contract is an agreement to do or refrain from doing a particular thing. A person who fails
to discharge his obligation will give the other contractual party a right to insist on the actual
performance or to obtain compensation for non-performance of such contract. Specific
performance of a contract is its actual execution. Specific performance consists in
contracting party’s exact fulfillment of the obligation which he has assumed in his doing or
omitting the very act which he has undertaken not to do.
Halsbury defines ‘specific performance is an equitable relief given by the court in case of
breach of contract. Generally , in a breach of contract which results when party not
complying with the terms of the contract, there are two remedies given by the court one is
compensation or damages and the other is specific performance as specific relief. When the
compensation or damages is not an adequate relief for the innocent party in a contract, he
or she can apply for specific performance of the contract .(Saru Meah V Jahanara Begum 8
DLR 616) As Bentham said: “The law ought to assure me everything which is mine, without
forcing me to accept equivalents, although I have no particular objection to them. In a
breach of contract case, the court can consider ordering specific performance as long as the
innocent party asks for that remedy. This equitable remedy orders the breaching party to
comply with the terms of the contract. This means that the breaching party will be required
to do whatever the party originally promised to do.
However, a party seeking specific performance must come with clean hands and he must
be ready to perform his part of the contract. As the equity maxim says, He who comes into
equity must come with clean hands.
Specific performance is a remedy available at the discretion of the court. A court won’t
decree specific performance merely because it is lawful, there has to be a great deal of
influencing factors which a court must take into account and then apply its mind and
juridical discretion to either grant or refuse such specific performance.
Specific relief Act provides guiding principles and grounds for when specific performance
may be granted and refused. Cases where court may grant specific performance of the
contract according to section 12 of the SR act 1877.
a) Where compensation is not an adequate relief
The court may grant specific performance to the plaintiff where it is of the opinion that
compensation as a remedy for breach of the contract would not be a sufficient relief. Where
plaintiff would be at disadvantage if specific performance of the contract was not granted.
Hence the court may order specific performance.
For example : A contracts to sell and B contracts to buy a certain number of railway shares
of a particular description. A refuses to complete the sale. B may compel A specifically to
perform this agreement, for the shares are limited and not always available in market.
b) Where compensation is undeterminable and there is no standard for ascertaining
actual damage caused by nonperformance of the act agreed to be done.
A agrees to buy and B agrees to sell a painting by a dead painter. B refuses. A can compel
specific performance.
c) When it is probable that pecuniary compensation cannot be gotten for the
non -performance of the act agreed to be done.

d) When the act agreed to be done is in the performance of a trust

Cases where court may refuse specific performance of a contract according to section 21 of
the Specific Relief Act 1877 :
a) Where compensation in money is an adequate relief for non-performance of the
contract
A contracts to sell, B contracts to buy 50 boxes of meezan oil at Rs 1000 per box. Held
compensation in money would not be an inadequate relief.
Therefore, when pecuniary compensation on the breach of a contract would be good
enough to satisfy the object of the court on the opposite party ,then specific performance
shall not be accepted a s a relief.
 b) Where contract runs into numerous minute elaborations and is detailed abnormally;
so, it is difficult for court to supervise each and every provision of the contract to its
execution, hence the court may refuse because of contract’s technicalities. Contracts
relating to buildings and repairs are usually as such.
A contracts B to let him land for cultivation in a particular manner which is impractical for
common course of nature. Or A contracts B to write a critique on the communist manifesto
not offending to Marxists, etc. Such contracts are not specifically enforceable.
c) Where contract involves performance of a skill, courts are then hesitant to grant
specific performance because a skill performed involuntarily may not solve as much
problems as it may create. Hence such contracts usually courts don’t grant specific
execution.
A contracts B to compose and sing a melody/song but refuse to do afterwards or couldn’t
perform the task, so it is most likely that court won’t order specific performance.
d) Where the terms and conditions of contract are not certain enough but vogue,
hence court may refuse specific performance
A contracts B to build him a well-furnished house and to be on the developed standards.
Such terminologies held have no consonance in law and must have been described in detail.
Court won’t allow specific performance as standard varies for each second person what a
well-furnished house is.
e) When contract made by trustee is in breach of trust or excess of trust, court won’t
decree specific performance
Where trustee was entitled to let a certain property of trust for not more than 5 years, a
contract of lease for 7 years with Mr. B would not be specifically enforceable because of lack
of authority.

f) A contract which in its nature is revocable, will not be specifically enforced by the
court.
A & B contracts to become partners in a certain business, the contract not specifying the
duration of proposed partnership (partnership at will). This contract cannot be specifically
performed, for if it were so performed either A or B might at once dissolve the partnership.
g) A contract which involves performance of a continuous duty over a longer period
than 3 years
A contracts to let for 18 years to B the right to use such part of a certain railway made by A
as was upon B’s land. Specific performance of this contract must be refused to B.

The cases principles and instances mentioned hereinabove are to guide the courts when
determining the issue of specific performance among litigants to the contract. It must be
kept in mind that court has only the discretion to either refuse or grant such equitable
remedy of specific performance. And courts must too observe such principles and exercise
their discretion judicially, for the discretion bestowed upon them is not of arbitrary nature
but a rational and judicious one. The court must not grant specific relief on merely this.