RECTIFICATION (SECTION 26)

Section 26 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 addresses the rectification of contracts or other written
instruments in cases where the expressed terms do not reflect the real intention of the parties due to
fraud or mutual mistake. The section outlines the following provisions

• Parties' Remedies: Either party or their representative can initiate a lawsuit to rectify the
instrument, or the plaintiff can include a claim for rectification in a suit where the rights arising from
the instrument are in question. Additionally, a defendant in such a suit can request rectification as a
defense.

• Court's Discretion: If the court finds, in a suit seeking rectification, that the instrument fails to
express the true intention of the parties due to fraud or mistake, it can exercise its discretion to direct
the rectification of the instrument to align with their actual intention. However, this rectification
should not prejudice the rights of third parties who have acquired rights in good faith and for value.

• Rectification and Specific Performance: A written contract that has been rectified, upon the
prayer of the party seeking rectification in their pleading and at the discretion of the court, may
subsequently be specifically enforced.

• Claim Requirement: No relief for rectification can be granted unless it has been specifically
claimed by the party. However, the court has the authority to allow the amendment of the pleading to
include such a claim at any stage of the proceeding if it deems it just to do so.

Section 26 provides a legal recourse for parties to rectify written instruments when their true
intentions have been misrepresented due to fraud or mutual mistake. By allowing for rectification and
subsequent enforcement, the section aims to uphold the integrity and fairness of contractual
agreements.

2. Rectification of Pleadings or Mistakes:

Rectification of the pleadings in a suit is not explicitly mentioned in Section 26 but is governed by
Order VI Rule 17 CPC. Here’s how the rectification process operates:

a. Order VI Rule 17 - Amendment of Pleadings:

 Parties can amend their pleadings at any stage of the proceedings with the court's permission.
 Such amendments are allowed to determine the real questions in controversy between the
parties.

b. Errors or Omissions:

 Clerical mistakes, typographical errors, or inadvertent omissions in the plaint or written

statement can be rectified through amendments.
 The court can allow the rectification if it does not cause injustice or prejudice to the other
party.

c. Timeline for Rectification:

 Amendments should generally be sought before the commencement of the trial.

 After the trial begins, amendments can only be made if the party seeking amendment satisfies
the court with valid reasons for the delay.

 Rajesh Kumar Aggarwal v. K.K. Modi (2006): The Supreme Court held that amendments
should be liberally allowed to advance substantial justice unless it causes prejudice to the opposite
party.
 Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai (2003): Explained that procedural laws are handmaidens of
justice and must be interpreted to ensure the effective administration of justice.

RESCISSION (SECTIONS 27-30)Section 27 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with the circumstances in
which a contract may be rescinded or refused to be rescinded. The section provides the following provisions:

• Grounds for Rescission: Any person with a vested interest in a contract can sue for its rescission.
The court may adjudicate the rescission of the contract in the following cases: o The contract is
voidable or terminable by the plaintiff. o The contract is unlawful for reasons not apparent on its face,
and the defendant is more responsible for the unlawfulness than the plaintiff.

• Grounds for Refusal of Rescission: Notwithstanding the provisions in sub-section (1), the court
may refuse to rescind the contract in the following situations: o The plaintiff has expressly or
implicitly ratified the contract. o Due to circumstances that have occurred since the contract was
made (not due to any act of the defendant), the parties cannot be substantially restored to their
original positions.

o Third parties have acquired rights in good faith and for value during the existence of the contract.
o Only a part of the contract is sought to be rescinded, and such part is inseparable from the rest of
the contract.

Section 28 addresses the rescission of contracts for the sale or lease of immovable property when a
decree for specific performance has been granted but the purchaser or lessee fails to pay the required
amount within the specified time. The provisions state that the vendor or lessor may apply for
rescission of the contract, either partially or entirely, and the court may order such rescission as it
deems just. The court may also direct the restoration of possession to the vendor or lessor and the
payment of accrued rents and profits. If the purchaser or lessee pays the required amount within the
given period, the court may award further relief, including the execution of a conveyance or lease and
delivery of possession

Section 29 allows a plaintiff in a suit for specific performance to pray alternatively for rescission and
cancellation of the contract if specific enforcement is not possible. If the court refuses to enforce the
contract specifically, it may order the contract to be rescinded and delivered up for cancellation.

Section 30 empowers the court, upon granting rescission of a contract, to require the party receiving
such relief to restore any benefit received from the other party and make any compensation deemed
just by the court. These sections provide a legal framework for the rescission of contracts and outline
the circumstances under which rescission may be granted or refused. The court's discretion plays a
significant role in determining whether rescission is appropriate and the subsequent equitable actions
to be take

Section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with the circumstances in which cancellation of a
written instrument may be ordered. The section provides the following provisions: • Grounds for
Cancellation: Any person against whom a written instrument is void or voidable, and who has
reasonable apprehension that the instrument, if left outstanding, may cause serious injury, may file a
lawsuit seeking to have the instrument declared void or voidable. The court has the discretion to
adjudicate the instrument as void or voidable and order its delivery and cancellation.

• Effect on Registered Instruments: If the instrument has been registered under the Indian
Registration Act, 1908, the court must send a copy of its decree to the officer in whose office the
instrument has been registered. The officer will then note the cancellation of the instrument in their
records.

Section 32 states that in cases where an instrument is evidence of different rights or obligations, the
court may, in an appropriate situation, partially cancel the instrument and allow it to remain valid for
the remaining parts. Section 33 deals with the power of the court to require the restoration of
benefits or compensation when an instrument is cancelled or successfully resisted as void or voidable.

• Cancellation of Instrument: When an instrument is cancelled by the court, the court may require the
party receiving relief to restore any benefit received from the other party and make any compensation as
deemed just by the court. • Successful Resistance: If a defendant successfully resists a suit on the ground
that the instrument sought to be enforced against them is voidable or that the agreement sought to be enforced
is void due to their incapacity to contract, the court may require the defendant to restore any benefit received
under the instrument or agreement to the other party, to the extent that they have benefited from it. These
sections provide the legal framework for the cancellation of written instruments. They allow individuals to seek
the cancellation of void or voidable instruments that may cause them harm, and provide the court with the
power to order the delivery, cancellation, and restoration of benefits or compensation.