: 1 : sa.259.2011+ vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.259 OF 2011 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. .. Appellant V/s. Sujata Appa Rajage & anr. .. Respondents Mr.P.S. Dani i/b Ms.Pallavi Dabholkar for the Appellant Mr.G.N. Salunkhe i/b M.V. Shingade for the Respondent No.1 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DECEMBER 13, 2011 P.C.: 1. The appeal is admitted on the following grounds: i) Whether the learned Judges of the Courts below have overlooked the fact that than an advertisement for appointment of dealers is only an invitation for offer with certain terms and conditions; one of the conditions being the land offered by the person desiring to be appointed as a dealer and if such person offers one land on the basis of which the suitability is judged and subsequently such land cannot be made available by such person; an essential ingredient of the offer is lacking and hence the very foundation of the in principle tentative acceptance of the offer vanishes thereby entitling the appellant to withdraw the : 2 : sa.259.2011+ LOI; and whether such an action of the appellant could have ever been construed to be a breach of any statutory or contractual obligation so as to grant a discretionary relief under the Specific Relief Act, 1963? ii) Whether the learned District Judge was justified in holding that there was allegedly no specific denial in the Written Statement of the Appellant in respect of the averments of the Plaintiff in the plaint regarding pressure exerted by her contesters on the owner of the land for not letting it to her. The learned Judge ought to have considered the fact that since the said alleged fact or occurrence or a matter between the Plaintiff/Respondent, owner of the said land and other contesters, Defendant No.1/Appellant could not have commented on it and in any case the reasons as to why the Plaintiff was unable to provide the lands offered by her was a wholly irrelevant aspect for the entire litigation? iii) Whether the learned District Judge erred in not considering that it was an essential condition that the Applicant was to give details of the lands with the application itself and no other land offered subsequentlyl would be considered and that it was a “Sine Qua Non” for eligibility, and having been clearly communicated to all candidates, it was incumbent upon them to comply with the same and the civil Court will not have jurisdiction to grant a relief under the Specific : 3 : sa.259.2011+ Relief Act, 1963 thereby substituting or waiving the said essential condition? iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the present case where the advertisement issued was for appointing agents of the appellant, a decree for specific performance can be passed or the plaintiff could have been awarded damages? (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.) : 4 : sa.259.2011+ vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO.666 OF 2011 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.259 OF 2011 A/W CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1505 OF 2011 IN SECOND APPEAL NO.259 OF 2011 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. .. Appellant V/s. Sujata Appa Rajage & anr. .. Respondents Mr.P.S. Dani i/b Ms.Pallavi Dabholkar for the Applicant in CAS/666/2011 and for Respondent in CAS/1505/2011 Mr.G.N. Salunkhe i/b M.V. Shingade for Applicant in CAS/1505/2011 and for the Respondent No.1 in CAS/666/2011 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: DECEMBER 13, 2011 P.C.: 1. During the pendency of the present second appeal, the appellant is permitted to advertise for a a petrol pump dealership in Gondhavale. However, before issuing the letter of intent, the appellant shall seek permission from this Court in the present Second Appeal. In case an advertisement is issued and fresh applications are called for by the : 5 : sa.259.2011+ appellant in respect of the petrol pump, the respondent is at liberty to apply for the same and respondent’s application will be considered without prejudice to her rights and contentions in this appeal. 2. The execution of the decree is stayed, during the pendency of the appeal. 3. Both the Civil applications are disposed of accordingly. (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.)