TMI Blog1999 (2) TMI 663X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he work was to be completed within 5 months, half the work to be completed within 10 months and 3/4 work was to be completed within 15 months. The work order was issued to the appellant on 26th December, 1960 who started construction on 28th December, 1960. The Superintending Engineer is alleged to have obstructed the progress of the work with the result that the work could not be completed within the time schedule. The contract executed between the parties was rescinded by the respondents vide letter dated 19.6.61 on the ground that the appellant had not completed even 10 per cent of the work despite lapse of more than 9 months. The appellant however, contended that the termination of the contract was in breach thereof. He claimed ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he trial court passed on 30th November, 1973 by which his client was granted pendent lite interest. It is submitted that the non granting of the interest for the period of litigation was an accidental omission which was rectified by the trial court. In support of his contention he has relied upon the judgments in Jainab Bai and Ors. v. Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, [1969] Madhya Pradesh Journal P. 716; Feroz Shah v. State, AIR (1957) Madhya Bharat p. 50; Maharaja Puttu Lal v. Sripal Singh and Ors., AIR (1937) Oudh p. 191 and West Bengal Financial Corporation and Anr. v.bertram Scott (I) Ltd., AIR 1983 Calcutta p. 381. Section 152 C.P.C. provides for correction of clerical arithmetical mistakes in judgments, decrees or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... despite the prayer of the appellant for grant of interest with effect from the date of alleged breach which impliedly meant that the court had rejected the claim of the appellant in so far as pendente lite interest was concerned. The omission in not granting the pendente lite interest could not be held to be accidental omission or mistake as was wrongly done by the trial court vide order dated 30th November, 1973. The High Court was, therefore, justified in setting aside the aforesaid order by accepting the revision petition filed by the State. The reliance of the learned counsel for the appellant on Jainab Bai case(supra) is misplaced inasmuch as in that case the aggrieved party had sought for award of interest after the decree, by fil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ist the claim of the decree holder. The West Bengal Financial Corporation's case does not in any way help the appellant inasmuch as in that case the scope of Section 152 was not at all considered as the only point decided was that a plaintiff is entitled as of right to the grant of interest under Section 34 of the C.P.C. In view of what we have held in this case regarding the ambit and scope of Section 152 of the C.P.C., we are of the opinion that view of Madhya Bharat High Court cannot be held to be based upon sound principles. The claim of the petitioner for payment of ₹ 20,000 as damages on account of breach of contract committed by the respondent- State was disallowed by the High Court as the appellant was found to have not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ting the work committed breach of contract, the contractor is entitled to claim the damages for loss of profit which he expected to earn by undertaking the works contract. Claim of expected profits is legally admissible on proof of the breach of contract by the erring party. It was observed : What would be the measure of profit would depend upon facts and circumstances of each case. But that there shall be a reasonable expectation of profit is implicit in a works contract and its loss has to be compensated by way of damages if the other party to the contract is guilty of breach of contract cannot be gainsaid. In this case we have the additional reason for rejecting the contention that for the same type of work, the work site being in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when the High Court had concurred with the finding of the trial court regarding breach of contract by specially holding that we therefore see no reason to inter-fere with the finding recorded by the trial court that the defendants by rescinding the agreement committed breach of contract. It follows there- fore as and when the breach of contract is held to have been proved being contrary to law and terms of the agreement, the erring party is legally bound to compensate the other party to the agreement. The appellate court was, therefore, not justified in disallowing the claim of the appellant for ₹ 20,000 on account of damages as expected profit out of the contract which was found to have been illegally rescinded. The appellate co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
