Justice Surya Kant On The 2018 Amendment To The Specific Relief Act | Legally Speaking

In a keynote address at Legally Speaking’s Third Law & Constitution Dialogue, Justice Surya Kant, Hon’ble Judge of the Supreme Court of India, explored the transformative 2018 Amendment to the Specific Relief Act of 1963. His speech emphasized the amendment’s pivotal role in aligning India’s legal framework with its aspirations as a global economic powerhouse, fostering greater efficiency, predictability, and business-friendly practices in contract law.

Historical Roots of the Specific Relief Act, 1963

Justice Kant began by reflecting on the Act’s origins, noting that it was designed to provide remedies for civil rights infringements, particularly in cases of contract breaches. Central to the original Act was the principle ‘ubi jus ibi remedium’ “where there is a right, there is a remedy.”

However, the original law applied the inadequacy test, granting specific performance only in exceptional cases where monetary compensation was deemed insufficient. Justice Kant observed that this approach often incentivized breaches of contract, as paying damages was frequently less onerous than fulfilling contractual obligations, echoing the “efficient breach theory” in law and economics.

The Call for Reform: Expert Committee’s Role

Justice Kant highlighted the limitations of the 1963 Act, especially in the context of modern infrastructure and public-private partnerships. Recognizing these gaps, a 2016 expert committee recommended reforms to modernize the legal framework, making it more responsive to India’s expanding economy and its increasing role in international business.

This expert review laid the foundation for the 2018 Amendment, which introduced several critical changes aimed at streamlining contract enforcement, enhancing judicial efficiency, and fostering a pro-business legal environment.

Key Reforms Introduced by the 2018 Amendment

Justice Kant detailed the transformative provisions of the amendment:

1. Specific Performance as a Right:
Previously granted only in exceptional cases, specific performance was made a default remedy, reflecting a robust approach to enforcing contractual obligations.

2. Streamlined Legal Process:
The requirement for explicit averments of willingness and readiness to perform a contract was removed, simplifying pleadings and reducing procedural hurdles.

3. Compensation in Addition to Performance:
Plaintiffs can now seek financial compensation alongside the fulfillment of contractual obligations, ensuring comprehensive remedies for breaches.

4. Substituted Performance:
In cases of breach, the amendment allows for third-party performance, with costs recoverable from the defaulting party. This provision is particularly beneficial for large-scale infrastructure projects where timely execution is critical.

5. Special Courts and Expert Assistance:
The amendment provides for special courts to expedite infrastructure-related disputes and allows courts to appoint experts for resolving complex commercial cases.

6. Time-Bound Resolution:
Cases under the Specific Relief Act must be resolved within 12 months, with a maximum six-month extension, underscoring the need for swift adjudication.

Impact on Infrastructure and Judicial Efficiency

Justice Kant underscored the amendment’s significance for infrastructure development. By banning injunctions that delay critical projects, the law ensures that disputes do not hinder national progress. Additionally, the time-bound resolution of cases reflects a commitment to reducing delays in the judicial process.

However, he cautioned that implementing these ambitious reforms requires substantial investment in judicial infrastructure and robust impact assessments to handle the increased caseload effectively.

A Catalyst for Economic Growth

Justice Kant contextualized the 2018 Amendment within India’s broader economic transformation, tracing its roots to the 1991 liberalization. He noted that reforms since then have improved India’s global standing, particularly its ease of doing business ranking, which rose from 142nd in 2014 to 63rd in 2019.

The 2018 Amendment, he argued, strengthens contract enforceability, thereby boosting investor confidence and creating a secure environment for business operations. By aligning India’s contract law with global best practices, the amendment reinforces the country’s position as an attractive destination for foreign investment.

Conclusion

Justice Kant hailed the 2018 Amendment as a landmark in modernizing India’s legal framework. By making specific performance the default remedy and emphasizing efficiency, the law fosters greater certainty in commercial transactions, aligning with India’s economic ambitions.

“The 2018 Amendment is not merely a legal reform—it is a strategic step toward strengthening India’s legal and economic landscape,” Justice Kant concluded, highlighting its role in paving the way for increased trade, investment, and prosperity.

This keynote address served as a compelling reminder of the dynamic interplay between law and economics, showcasing how legal innovation can drive national growth and global competitiveness.