I intend to file a "Suit for Damages" for recovering the expected profits on a LAND transaction with another layman person .....
Please advise me under which Cpc Order & Rule should I file the "suit for damages"
Thankyou
Divya (nil) 08 March 2012
I intend to file a "Suit for Damages" for recovering the expected profits on a LAND transaction with another layman person .....
Please advise me under which Cpc Order & Rule should I file the "suit for damages"
Thankyou
Adv.R.P.Chugh (Advocate/Legal Consultant (rpchughadvocatesupremecourt@hotmail.com)) 08 March 2012
You've not made yourself amply clear - However suit for damages are always filed u/s 9 CPC - which gives court to try all disputes of civil nature.
Divya (nil) 08 March 2012
Hi,
This is a Suit for damages as there was a breach of contract relating to a land deal wherein fraud was perpetrated by the seller..Now I intend to file had the sale been executed & had there been no fraud, then I could made these profits (expected profits during normal transaction)
Hope it clarifies.
Adv.R.P.Chugh (Advocate/Legal Consultant (rpchughadvocatesupremecourt@hotmail.com)) 08 March 2012
See if the consent to the contract is vitiated by fraud (S.17 Indian Contract Act) the contract is voidable and can be rescinded - there is no breach of contract - put an end to....in such a case there are no damages - you get restitution - the court would seek to restore you to place had the contract never been entered into - it would restore the status quo -as it existed before the contract - This restitution is sought u/s 64, and Suit filed u/s 27 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
However you also have the remedy of asking - the other party to perform the contract S.19 provides you the following right " A party to contract, whose consent was caused by fraud or mispresentation, may, if he thinks fit, insist that the contract shall be performed, and that he shall be put on the position in which he would have been if the representations made had been true".
See illustration (c)
(c) A fraudulently informs B that A’s estate is free from incumbrance. B thereupon buys the estate. The estate is subject to a mortgage. B may either avoid the contract, or may insist on its being carried out and mortgage-debt redeemed.
Now you have the above two remedies - either avoid contract and seek to be placed in pre-contract position or seek performance - on terms as if the fraud was never committed.