Back
ORISSA HIGH COURT
SANTOSH KUMAR NAIK – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF ODISHA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the plaintiff's contractual claims. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. defendants' claims denying plaintiffs' assertions. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court findings on absence of evidence. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. legal standard for impossibility of performance. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. court analysis of contract performance standards. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 6. conclusion: dismissal of 2nd appeal. (Para 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
A.C. BEHERA, J.
1. This 2nd Appeal has been preferred against the confirming judgment.
2. The appellant in this 2nd appeal was the plaintiff before the learned trial court in the suit vide C.S. No. 184 of 2013 and appellant before the learned 1st appellate court in the 1st appeal vide R.F.A. No. 46/20 of 2018-21.
The respondents in this 2nd appeal were the defendants before the learned trial court in the suit vide C.S. No.184 of 2013 and the respondents before the learned 1st appellate court in the 1st appeal vide R.F.A. No.46/20 of 2018-21.
3. The suit of the plaintiff (appellant in this 2nd appeal) against the defendants(respondents in this 2nd appeal) vide C.S. No.184 of 2013 was a suit for declaration and mandatory injunction.
As per the case of the plaintiff, he (plaintiff) is an A-C
A party alleging impossibility under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act must substantiate claims with evidence; self-induced circumstances do not qualify for relief.
A contracting party must prove the impossibility of performance to invoke Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872; self-induced inability does not excuse breach.
The burden of proving impossibility under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act rests on the asserting party; failure to provide such evidence results in dismissal of claims.
The burden of proving impossibility under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act lies with the party asserting it, and self-induced inability does not justify non-performance.
A contract can be frustrated by an event that makes it impossible for the parties to perform their obligations under the contract.
The plaintiff must establish a prima facie case and show irreparable loss to obtain an injunction. The court will consider the balance of convenience and the nature of the suit in reaching its decisi....
Non-service of statutory notice under Section 80 of the C.P.C. is waivable if no objection is raised in the defendants' written statement, allowing the suit to be maintained.
The court reinforced that under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the scope for judicial interference with arbitral awards is limited, particularly regarding factual findings.
Breach of contract – Award of damages—Work schedule is required for progressive payment and target and it is sine qua non for execution of contracted work.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
