Skip to content
Thursday, 12 November 2026 Judgments, law jobs and study notes, written by a practising advocate
Specific Relief Act, 1963 · Chapter V: Cancellation Of Instruments

Section 33 Specific Relief Act: Power to require benefit to be restored or compensation to be made when instrument is cancelled or is successfully resisted as being void or voidable

Bare Act text

33. Power to require benefit to be restored or compensation to be made when instrument is cancelled or is successfully resisted as being void or voidable.—(1) On adjudging the cancellation of an instrument, the court may require the party to whom such relief is granted, to restore, so far as may be any benefit which he may have received from the other party and to make any compensation to him which justice may require.

(2) Where a defendant successfully resists any suit on the ground—

(a) that the instrument sought to be enforced against him in the suit is voidable, the court may if the defendant has received any benefit under the instrument from the other party, require him to restore, so far as may be, such benefit to that party or to make compensation for it;

(b) that the agreement sought to be enforced against him in the suit is void by reason of his not having been competent to contract under section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872), the court may, if the defendant has received any benefit under the agreement from the other party, require him to restore, so far as may be, such benefit to that party, to the extent to which he or his estate has benefited thereby.

Text of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (Act No. 47 of 1963), as amended up to the Specific Relief (Amendment) Act, 2018. Source: India Code, Government of India.

In simple words

Under sub-section (1), the court may cancel an instrument. It may require the party who obtains that relief to restore any benefit received from the other party, so far as may be. It may also require him to make any compensation justice requires. Under sub-section (2), a defendant may successfully resist a suit. Under clause (a), the instrument may be voidable and the defendant may have received a benefit. The court may then require him to restore it or compensate for it. Under clause (b), the agreement may be void because he was not competent to contract under section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The court may then require restoration of any benefit, to the extent he or his estate benefited.

Chapter V: Cancellation Of Instruments

  1. 31 When cancellation may be ordered
  2. 32 What instruments may be partially cancelled
  3. 33 Power to require benefit to be restored or compensation to be made when instrument is cancelled or is successfully resisted as being void or voidable