Specific Performance Enforceable, As per Lawkidunya, the word Specific Performance is an equitable remedy in the law of contract, whereby a court issues an order requiring a party to perform a specific act, such as to complete performance of the contract.
What is Unenforceable Contract
As per Lawkidunya, an unenforceable contract or transaction is one that is valid but one the court will not enforce. Unenforceable is usually used in contradiction to void and voidable. If the parties perform the agreement, it will be valid, but the court will not compel them if they do not.
Section 12 Cases in Which Specific Performance Enforceable
As per Lawkidunya, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, the specific performance of any contract may in the discretion of the Court be enforced-
(a) when the act agreed to be done is in the performance, wholly or partly, of a trust;
(b) when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by non-performance of the act agreed to be done;
(c) when the act agreed to be done is such that pecuniary compensation for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief; or
(d) when it is probable that pecuniary compensation cannot be got for the non-performance of the act agreed to be done.
Explanation – Unless and until the contrary is proved, the Court shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money, and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be thus relieved.
of clause (b)-
A agrees to buy, and B agrees to sell, a picture by a dead painter and two rare china vases. A may compel B specifically to perform this contract, for there is no standard for ascertaining the actual damage which would be caused by its non-performance. of clause (c)-
A contracts with B to sell him a house for taka 1,000. B is entitled to a decree directing A to convey the house to him, he paying the purchase-money.
In consideration of being released from certain obligations imposed on it by its act of Incorporation, a railway-company contract with Z to make an archway through there railway to connect lands of Z severed by the railway, to construct a road between certain specified points, to pay a certain annual sum towards the maintenance of this road, and also to construct a siding and a wharf as specified in the contract.
Z is entitled to have this contract specifically enforced for his interest in its performance cannot be adequately compensated for by money: and the Court may appoint a proper person to superintend the construction of the archway, road, siding and wharf.
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 in number and not always to be had in the market, and their possession carries with it the status of a share-holder, which cannot otherwise be procured.
A contracts with B to paint a picture for B, who agrees to pay therefor taka 1,000. The picture is painted. B is entitled to have it delivered to him on payment or tender of the taka 1,000.
A transfers without endorsement, but for valuable consideration, a promissory note to B. A becomes insolvent, and C is appointed his assignee. B may compel C to endorse the note, for C has succeeded to A’s liabilities, and a decree for pecuniary compensation for not endorsing the note would be fruitless.