Specific Relief Act, 1963 · Chapter V: Cancellation of Instruments
Section 31: When cancellation may be ordered
(1) Any person against whom a written instrument is void or voidable, and who has reasonable apprehension that such instrument, if left outstanding may cause him serious injury, may sue to have it adjudged void or voidable; and the court may, in its discretion, so adjudge it and order it to be delivered up and cancelled.
(2) If the instrument has been registered under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 (16 of 1908), the court shall also send a copy of its decree to the officer in whose office the instrument has been so registered; and such officer shall note on the copy of the instrument contained in his books the fact of its cancellation.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 16 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 31
-
K.S. Manjunath and Others v. Moorasavirappa @ Muttanna Chennappa
Whether the High Court committed any error in passing the impugned judgment whereby it allowed the appeals filed by the vendees and set aside the decree passed by the Trial Court, while granting the relief of specific…
-
Mrs. Shailja Krishna v. Satori Global Limited & Ors.
Whether the company petition decided in favour of the Appellant by the NCLT was maintainable u/ss.397 and 398, Companies Act, 1956 Act; assuming that the company petition was maintainable, whether the NCLT had…
-
K. Mangayarkarasi & Anr. v. N.J. Sundaresan & Anr.
Can a trademark infringement suit be referred to arbitration if the defendant questions its maintainability on the ground of existence of an arbitration agreement between the parties and seeks a reference under Section…
-
Ltd. v. His Highness Maharaja Sir Brijnath Singhji Deo of Maihar
Whether the High Court was right in taking the view that the suit of the plaintiff for declaration of his title based on a valid Gift Deed should fail as the plaintiff omitted to pray for the consequential relief of…
-
Bano Saiyed Parwaz v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and
The High Court dismissed the appellant’s demand for refund of Stamp Duty paid towards an un-executed conveyance deed.
- Union of India & Ors. v. M/S. Bharat Enterprise
- Veena Singh (Dead) Through Lr v. The District Registrar/Additional Collector (F/R) and Another
- Mr. Rajeev Nohwar v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Maharashtra State, Pune and Others
- Vidya Drolia and Others v. Durga Trading Corporation
- Deccan Paper Mills Co. Ltd. v. Regency Mahavir Properties & Ors.
- Rameshwar & Others v. State of Haryana & Others
- Satya Pal Anand v. State of M.P. & Ors.
- Om Prakash Singh v. M. Lingamaiah & Ors.
- Vishwanath Bapurao Sabale v. Shalinibai Nagappa Sabale & Ors.
- Abdul Rahim & Ors. v. Sk. Abdul Zabar & Ors.
- Madan Mohan Mishra v. Chanrika Pandey (Dead) by Lrs.
- Ranganayakamma and Another v. K.S. Prakash (D) by L.Rs. and Others
- Prem Singh and Ors. v. Birbal and Ors.
- Lalit Kumar Jain and Anr. v. Jaipur Traders Corporation Pvt. Ltd.
- Rameshwar Dubey and Ors. v. Masomat Asha Kaur and Ors.
- Md. Noorul Hoda v. Bibi Raifunnisa and Ors.
- Commissioner_ of Income Tax, Kanpur v. Kamla Town Trust