Defaulting party not to liable to pay interest on amount of compensation from the date of filing plaint.

M. Thanikachalam, J.

The unsuccessful defendant before the trial Court is the appellant.

2. The respondent/plaintiff's case in brief:

(a) The plaintiff/respondent had called for sealed tenders, for the disposal of bran, for the quarter ending 1.10.1980 to 31.12.1980, in which the appellant/defendant had participated, by offering their estimate. The offer made by the defendant being the highest, for cone polished raw rice bran as well as for cone polished boiled rice bran at Rs.1186.70 and Rs.1567.40 per metric ton, respectively, was accepted by the plaintiff Corporation, as per the proceedings dated 28.1.1981. Thereafter, the acceptance was intimated to the defendant, requesting them to execute an agreement, as well as to furnish security deposit of Rs.10,000/-. Despite the fact the defendant had participated in the tender, had made offer, which was accepted by the plaintiff, they failed to act as per the terms of the tender, resulting re-tender on 2.1.1981. Due to fluctuation in prices, M/s. Foods, Fats and Fertilisers, Madras, had offered the rate of Rs.950/- per metric ton, for cone polished raw rice bran and Rs.600/- per metric ton, for boiled raw rice bran, which was accepted by the plaintiff Corporation, as per the proceedings dated 2.9.1981.

(b) The plaintiff/respondent Corporation, because of the default committed by the appellant/defendant, in not acting as per the terms of the tender, as well as due to breach of contract, sustained a total loss of Rs.58,332.22, which is liable to be reimbursed by the defendant, even as per the terms of the contract. The notice issued by the plaintiff corporation failed to realise the amount, thereby compelling the plaintiff to move the Court, for the recovery of a sum of Rs.58,332.22, with future interest from the defendant/appellant.

3. The defendant/appellant, in their written statement, denying the allegations in the plaint, would contend, that there was no concluded contract between the parties, even as per the tender conditions, that the offer made by the defendant alone is not conclusive, to conclude that there was a concluded contract, in the absence of follow up actions, such as deposit of security amount, execution of the agreement, that the plaintiff had not acted bonafidely, since they failed to make available the cone polished bran, as required by the defendant in their tender, that there was no bonafide on the part of the plaintiff in tendering for very low amount than quoted on the earlier occasion by M/s. Food, Fats and Fertilisers Ltd., and giving the tender to them, and that in any event, the damages claimed by the plaintiff is unlawful and usurious.

4. On the basis of the above pleadings, the trial Court proceeded with the trial of the case, after framing four issues. On behalf of the plaintiff, one Thiru Narayanan has been examined as P.W.1, who sought the aid of Exs.A1 to A.16 to buttress the claim. To negative the above evidence, and to seek strength for the defence raised in the written statement, one Chandrasekaran has been examined as D.W.1. No document has been produced in support of his oral testimony.

5. The learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Vellore by scanning the materials and considering the legal aspects, came to the conclusion, that there was a concluded contract between the parties, that in view of the breach committed by the defendant, the plaintiff had sustained loss, to the extent of Rs.58,322.22. Thus concluding, to compensate the loss sustained by the plaintiff Corporation, a judgment was rendered, granting a decree in favour of the plaintiff on 28.4.1989, which is under challenge in this appeal.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. N.C. Rangarajan and the learned counsel for the respondent, Ms. V.J. Latha.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant/defendant submits, that there is no concluded contract between the parties, which could be enforced in a Court of law and that in the absence of the concluded contract and in the