The main legal point established is that despite the absence of a specific clause in the contract, a party can claim damages for breach of contract under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The court also clarified the limitation period for filing such suits under The Limitation Act, 1963.

1. This is a suit for claiming damages from the defendant.

2. Broadly but briefly, narratively but precisely, the case of the plaintiff as stood exposited from the plaint could be portrayed thus:

The plaintiff is the owner of the property situated in Survey No.348/2, measuring an extent of 11,900 sq.ft with a super structure there on. On 17.04.1998, an agreement was emerged between the plaintiff and the defendant on certain terms and conditions set out therein, whereby the defendant was expected to construct flats and deliver possession of the same to the plaintiff within two years. It is also one of the clauses in the agreement that the plaintiff should hand over the old existing super structure over an extent of 2400 sq.ft in the said larger extent on or before 31.05.1998 so as to enable the builder to put up flats. Accordingly, the plaintiff handed over possession of the said property to the defendant on 31.05.1998; thereat the defendant demolished the said old super structure and removed the teak wood materials available in the said building. To the shock and surprise of the plaintiff, thereafter, there was no progress in making construction by the defendant, who as per the said agreement earlier agreed to pay also a sum of Rs.10,000/- p.m to the plaintiff till the defendant completes the construction and hands over possession. The conduct of the defendant, necessitated and propelled, actuated and accentuated the plaintiff to issue her notice dated 16.02.2001 terminating the said agreement and calling upon the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.5 lakhs as damages for the loss sustained by the plaintiff. After handing over possession of the said property to the defendant for effecting construction, the plaintiff was constrained to occupy a tenanted premises. The plaintiff after such termination of the said agreement, entered into a fresh agreement with one another builder and got the flats constructed and occupied the same by March 2003. Till then, the defendants liability to pay the sum of Rs.10, 000/- per month to the plaintiff accrued to an extent of 5,70,000/-. Had the defendant, as per the agreement performed her part of the contract and completed the construction of the flats, the plaintiff would not have sustained loss to the tune of Rs.10 lakhs. However, the plaintiff restricted her claim for damages to the tune of Rs.5 lakhs only under that count. The plaintiff therefore, filed the suit claiming a sum of Rs.5,70,000/- representing the arrears, which accrued due to non-payment of Rs.10,000/- every month from 01.06.1998 till 28.02.2003 and also for recovery of damages to the tune of Rs.5 lakhs totalling Rs.10,70,000/-.

3. Per contra, refuting and remonstrating, impugning and gain saying in toto the allegations/averments in the plaint, the defendant filed the written statement, the nitty gritty, the gist and kernel of them would run thus:

The defendant did not enter into such suit agreement at all with the plaintiff as alleged in the plaint and for that matter the suit property was not handed over to the defendant. The defendant did not remove the alleged teak wood materials available from the building concerned; she did not agree to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/-per month as alleged in the plaint; she was not in receipt of the plaintiffs alleged termination notice dated 16.02.2001. The plaintiff is not entitled to claim the sum of Rs.5, 70,000/- on the alleged ground of arrears due to non-payment of a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month. The defendant is not liable to pay damages to the tune of Rs.5 lakhs also. The suit is barred by limitation. Accordingly, she prayed for the dismissal of the suit.

4. Based on the pleadings my learned predecessor framed the following issues:

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a sum of Rs.10, 70,000/- as prayed for in the plaint?

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim interest at the rate of 24% p.a on the principal sum of Rs.5, 70,000/- from the date of the plaint till the date