1. The plaintiff of Special Civil Suit no. 59 / 96/ A has filed this appeal against the Judgment, Order and Decree dated 30/08/2003 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division at Ponda (“Trial Judge” for short), in the said Special Suit.

2. The parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the manner in which they appear in the cause title of the said Special Civil Suit no. 59/96/A.

3. The plaintiff had filed the said suit for recovery of an amount of Rs. 3,77,234.65 from the defendants as compensation along with interest at the rate of 25% per annum (p.a.) from 07/07/1995 till the date of full and final payment.

4. Case of the plaintiff, in short, is as follows:

He is a PWD contractor undertaking the works of constructing the roads and bridges for the PWD for the last 10 years. The defendant no.1 floated a tender for the work of construction of a bypass at Gadno, Caranzel in village panchayat Marcaim. The plaintiff submitted his quotation and his tender was accepted by the defendants for the contract amount of Rs. 19,48,231.00. The work was thereafter allotted to the plaintiff and formal contract was signed as per the work order and the contract dated 05/04/1994. As per the said contract, the work was to be commenced on 14/04/1994 and the time limit of completion of work was 450 days including monsoon and thus the date stipulated for completion of the work was 07/07/1995. Immediately after getting the work order, the plaintiff made arrangements to start the work by mobilizing the labour force, obtaining and arranging for supplies of the required construction material needed for the work. However the defendant no.1 failed to provide to the plaintiff the land required for the work. The land, where the work was to be carried out, was not acquired by the government even till the stipulated date of completion of work

i.e. 07/07/1995. The defendant no.1 therefore committed a fundamental breach of contract by failure to provide the site required for work due to which the plaintiff suffered huge losses as stated below:

(a) If the plaintiff had completed the said work in time, he would have earned anticipated profit thereon at least of Rs. 2,82,234.65 being 15% of the value of the work. These profits were denied to the plaintiff because of breach of contract by the defendants and therefore defendants are liable to compensate the plaintiff for the same.

(b) After the work was allotted to the plaintiff, the plaintiff made arrangement for carrying out the work and had paid advance of a sum of Rs. 40,000/-to the suppliers for the supply of laterite rubble stones, metal and sand. Since defendants could not provide the plaintiff with the site required for the work, he could not transport any of the material to the site and the advances paid by the plaintiff were lost permanently. Hence, the plaintiff is entitled to be compensated by the defendants for the said amount of Rs.40,000.00.

(c) The plaintiff has paid Rs. 25,000.00 to his piece work labour contractors in advance to ensure the presence of the labour force for executing the work. However since the defendants did not give the possession of the site to the plaintiff till 07/07/1995, the work could not be started. Hence the plaintiff is entitled to be compensated on this count also.

(d) The plaintiff had deposited with the defendants an Earnest Money Deposit (EMD) of Rs. 20,000.00 along With the tender for the work. After the work was allotted to the plaintiff, the said deposit was converted into a part of security deposit. Since the plaintiff was not able to start any work, due to the fundamental breach of contract by the defendants, the plaintiff is entitled to the refund of the said amount of Rs. 20,000.00.

The plaintiff therefore sent a legal notice by registered A.D. to the defendant no.2 on 24/04/1996 and called upon the defendants to pay the said amounts along with interest. The defendant no. 2 received the notice on 25/04/1996 but did not comply with the sam