Section 45 of the Specific Relief Act outlines the power of the High Court to order public servants to perform specific acts. To ensure the veracity of the claims made in such applications, the law mandates that the application must be supported by an affidavit from the person who has been injured by the omission or act of the public official.

Under the Limitation Act, 1908, the limitation period for filing a suit for the specific performance of a contract is three years. This period commences from the date fixed for performance, or if no such date is fixed, from the date when the plaintiff has notice that performance is refused. This ensures that contractual disputes are brought to court within a reasonable timeframe.

Section 40 of the Specific Relief Act allows for the partial cancellation of an instrument. If an instrument is evidence of different rights or obligations, the court may, in a proper case, cancel the instrument only in relation to the specific parts that are invalid or voidable, while allowing the remainder of the instrument to remain legally effective.

Section 50 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, explicitly states that no specific performance or other relief under the Act shall be granted in a manner that interferes with the specific powers of the High Court to issue writs, particularly mandamus. This ensures that the Act does not conflict with the constitutional writ jurisdiction of the High Courts.

Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, pertains to the rectification of instruments. It allows parties to seek court intervention to correct a written contract or instrument if it does not reflect the true intention of the parties due to fraud or mutual mistake. This ensures that legal documents accurately represent the underlying agreement between the parties involved.

Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act provides the statutory basis for a suit for declaration. It allows any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right as to any property, to institute a suit against any person denying, or interested to deny, his title to such character or right, seeking a court declaration of his status.

The granting of a decree for specific performance is not a matter of absolute right for the plaintiff but is governed by the discretionary power of the court. Under Section 22 of the Specific Relief Act, the court is not bound to grant such relief merely because it is lawful to do so, but will exercise its discretion based on the facts and circumstances of each case.

Section 8 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, deals with the recovery of specific immovable property, while Section 9 provides a summary remedy for recovery of possession by a person dispossessed without consent otherwise than in due course of law. Since the question asks for the section dealing with possession and the options provided do not include Section 8, 'None of these' is the technically correct choice based on the provided options.

Section 45 of the Specific Relief Act requires that an application for a writ must be supported by an affidavit from the person injured by the act or omission of the public official. This requirement ensures that the petitioner has a direct interest in the matter and provides a sworn statement of facts to the court, which is essential for initiating high-prerogative writ proceedings.

Section 5 of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, explicitly enumerates five distinct ways in which specific relief may be granted. These include taking possession of property, ordering a party to do a specific act, preventing a party from doing a specific act, determining and declaring rights, and appointing a receiver. This framework provides the foundational structure for civil remedies under the Act.