SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img



The plaintiff's action against the defendant is for damages for breach of contract arising from the sale of two new units of excavators sold by the plaintiff to the defendant. The plaintiff's claim is for the loss of the depreciated value of the two excavators which were recovered by the plaintiff from the defendant as a result of the repudiation of the contract by the defendant for the sale of the excavators.

The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is also for the recovery of rentals for two other units of excavators, namely, one new unit of the 115CL Poclain excavator and one used unit of the 90CL Poclain excavator which the plaintiff alleges were rented to the defendant.

The plaintiff in its statement of claim avers that by two agreements dated 23 August 1982, the plaintiff agreed to sell two new units of the Poclain hydraulic excavator, model 160CK at the price of RM290,000 each. A discount of RM20,000 was given by the plaintiff to the defendant towards the cost of the price of the two units of excavators. On 21 September 1982, the plaintiff delivered to the defendant one unit of the excavator, and on 28 September 1982, the second unit was delivered to the defendant. Both t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top