Breach of Contract Suit

SUIT FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT
Group - B
1st Memorial Submitted to
Vivekanand Education Society’s

College of Law
Sr. No PLAINTIFFS Roll No.

1 Aradhana Chatterjee 06
2 Manisha Menghani 20
3 Namrata Palaniswamy 24
4 Pooja Nair 22
DEFENDANTS
5 Deepak Sachwani 32
6 Payal Lokwani Bhojwani 18
7 Janvi Ahuja 01
8 Stavan Telgote 48
1
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION,
PUNE
Civil Suit No____/ 2017
R.D Parmanandka Pvt. Ltd. ,

Having Office at,
Office No.2 & 4, First Floor,
Galleria Apt, Karve Rd,
Near Vidya Sahakari Bank,
Kothrud, Pune,
Maharashtra 411029 … Plaintiff
Versus
Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd.

Having office at,
Office No 407-408,
Zenith complex 4th Floor,
Opposite Krishi Bhavan,
Shivajinagar, Pune, Maharashtra 411005 ...Defendant
2
INDEX
Sr. No Contents Page No.
1 VAKALATNAMA 4
2 ISSUES 5
3 PLAINT 6-9
4 VERIFICATION 10
5 PRAYER 11
6 AFFIDAVIT 12
7 WRITTEN ARGUMENT 13-14
8 EXHIBIT “A” 15-18

“ Copy of Sale Agreement”
9 EXHIBIT “B” 19
“Copy of profit and loss statement of Plaintiff Company from 1.01.2017 to
15.02.2017”
10 EXHIBIT “C” 20
“Copy of letter to defendant dated 20.02.2017”
11 EXHIBIT “D” 21
“Copy of reply from the defendant dated_______”
12 EXHIBIT “E” 22
“Copy of first notice dated 04.03.2017 to defendant”
13 EXHIBIT “F” 23-24

“Copy of Second Notice dated 20.03.2017 to defendant”
14 VAKALATNAMA (Respondent) 25
15 ISSUES 26
16 WRITTEN STATEMENT 27-28
17 VERIFICATION 29
18 AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT 30
19 WRITTEN ARGUMENTS 31-33
3
VAKALATNAMA
I, Mr. Shashank Shinde, director of the plaintiff company above named do hereby
appoint Pooja Nair, Manisha Menghani, Namrata Palaniswamy, and Aradhana
Chatterjee to act, Appear and plead for us in the above matter.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hands on this______ day of February 2021.
Accepted
Pooja Nair
Manisha Menghani
Namrata Palaniswamy
Aradhana Chatterjee
Advocates High Court
4
ISSUES
1. Whether the acceptance of a sum different than that in the contract
was valid and if it was then what was the effect of it on the original
contract?
2. Whether there was any breach of contract by Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd.
3. Whether losses were accrued to the plaintiff due to the breach
4. Whether the losses accrued to the plaintiff amounted to
Rs.1,50,000
5
SUIT FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT UNDER
SECTION 74 OF THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT.
PLAINT FILED UNDER SECTION 26, READ
WITH ORDER NO VII, RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF
CIVIL PROCEDURE
The Humble Application of the Plaintiff above named.
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:
It is submitted on behalf of the Plaintiff above mentioned as under:
1. That the Plaintiff company, having its registered address at, Office
No.2 & 4, First Floor, Galleria Apt, Karve Rd, near Vidya Sahakari
Bank, Kothrud, Pune, Maharashtra 411029 is a garment company
specialising in ladies garments and is registered under The
Companies Act, 2013.
2. The Plaintiff company is represented through it’s Director, Mr.
Shashank Shinde who has been the director since 2013 and is
in-charge of overseeing the affairs of the company, including sales.
3. The Defendant is also a company, having its registered office at,
Office No 407-408, Zenith complex 4th Floor, opposite Krishi
Bhavan, Shivajinagar, Pune, Maharashtra 411005 and specialises
in Children’s garments.
4. The Defendant company is represented by its Director, Ms. Rekha
Jha and to the Plaintiff’s knowledge also manages the sales
division of the company overseeing its functions.
5. The Plaintiff company entered into a sale agreement with the
defendant company for the purchase of 6000 units of kids garments
totaling to an amount of Rs.6,00,000/-, which was to be delivered to
the factory of the Plaintiff on or before 1st January, 2017. Hereto
6
annexed and marked as “Exhibit A” is a copy of the sales
agreement.
6. The Plaintiff further submits that shortly after the delivery of the
consignment, profits for the Plaintiff company reduced significantly
which resulted in the Plaintiff company to suffer horrific losses due
to loss of profitable contract with its major booking agents.
7. This resulted in the Plaintiff company to incur substantial damages
in profits as well as reputation. Hereto annexed and marked as
“Exhibit B” is a copy of the Plaintiff Company’s profit and loss
statement from 1.01.2017 to 15.02.2017.
8. Under these circumstances, the Plaintiff company wrote a letter
addressing the director of the company issue faced by the Plaintiff
and to request them to accept a payment of Rs.50,000/- as a final
payment of debts owed to the Defendant company by the Plaintiff.
Hereto annexed and marked as “Exhibit C” a copy of the letter
dated 20.02.2017.
9. The Defendant agreed to accept the payment of Rs.50,000/- in a
letter addressed to Mr.Shashank Shinde; Director and
representative of the Plaintiff company for the purposes of this suit.
Hereto annexed and marked as “Exhibit D” is a copy of the reply
sent by the Defendant.
10. The final consignment arrived to the factory of the Plaintiff and it
was found to be of poor quality. Due to the fact that the plaintiff
company was already suffering heavy losses, the abhorrent quality
of the kids garments would further cement the absolute demise of
the reputation and profit of the Plaintiff company. In order to control
the damage, a notice regarding the same was sent to the
Defendant on 04.03.2017. Hereto annexed and marked as “Exhibit
E” is a copy of the notice.
7
11. The notice sent was acknowledged and accepted by the Defendant
company however they didn't arrange for any exchange to take
place for the clothes.
12. The Plaintiff company was then compelled to send a legal notice
dated 20.03.2017. The legal notice was neither accepted, nor
acknowledged. Hereto annexed and marked as “Exhibit F” is a
copy of the legal notice.
13. In the aforesaid premises, the Plaintiffs submit and pray to this
Hon’ble court that the Defendant be decreed and ordered to pay to
the Plaintiffs a sum of Rs.1,50,000 with 10% counted from the date
of delivery of the poor quality garments as damages for breach of
contract.
14. The suit is filed as a Suit for Breach of Contract under The Indian
Contract act, 1972 and under the provisions of Section 26, Read
with Order No VII, Rule 1 of The Code Of Civil Procedure.
15. The Plaintiff craves leave to add, amend, alter, substitute or modify
this plaint as and when necessary.
16. For purposes of Court fees, the Plaintiffs have calculated Court
Fees on the amount of Rs. 1,50,000/- and have paid Court fees
thereon accordingly.
17. The cause of action for filing this suit arose on 03.03.2017 in Pune,
Maharashtra, when the Plaintiff sent the legal Notice and cause of
action continues since the Defendants have not made the said
payment. The suit is therefore within the period of three years
limitation. Hence the suit is filed in time.
18. The Defendant’s office is located at Pune, which is under the
jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Given under Section 9 of the Code
of Civil Procedure. This Hon’ble Court would therefore have the
jurisdiction to try and entertain the present suit.
19. The Plaintiffs have not sought any proceedings and/or claimed any
relief against the Defendants in any Court of law for recovery of the
8
present dues mentioned herein from the Defendant.
20. The Plaintiffs shall rely upon documents, a list whereof is separately
annexed hereto. That the Plaintiffs undertake to produce the
originals when required.
Pune
Dated _____ July 2017
PLAINT DRAWN BY:-
Pooja Nair
Manisha Menghani
Namrata Palaniswamy
Aradhana Chatterjee
Advocates
9
VERIFICATION
I, Mr. Shashank Shinde, director of the Plaintiff company above named,
do hereby state and declare on solemn affirmation that whatever stated
hereinabove is true and correct to my own knowledge.
Solemnly stated and declared at Pune (This ___day of July 2017 )
Before me
Identified by me
Pooja Nair
Manisha Menghani
Namrata Palaniswamy
Aradhana Chatterjee
Advocates for the Plaintiff
10
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, PUNE
Civil Suit No____/ 2017
R.D Parmanandka Pvt. Ltd. … Plaintiffs
V/s.
Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd. … Defendants
PRAYERS
(a) the Defendant be ordered and decreed to pay to the Plaintiffs, Rs.
1,50,000 being the outstanding amount with 10% interest per
annum from the date of the payment due till date or at any other
rate as this Honorable Court may deem fit and proper, from the
date of filing of the suit till payment and/or realization.
(b) That for such others and further reliefs, as may be necessitated by
this Hon’ble Court, may also be granted, in the interest of justice.
(c) That cost of the Suit be provided for.
Advocates for Plaintiff
11
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION, PUNE
Civil Suit No ____/ 2017
R.D Parmandaka Pvt. Ltd. … Plaintiffs
V/s.
Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd. … Defendants
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINT
I, Mr. Shashank Shinde, Director, R.D Parmanandka Pvt. Ltd. the

Plaintiff above named, having office at Office No.2 & 4, First Floor,
Galleria Apt, Karve Rd, near Vidya Sahakari Bank, Kothrud, Pune,
Maharashtra 411029 do hereby solemnly state as under:
That I have filed the above plaint against the defendant for the
reliefs as more particularly set out in the plaint. I repeat, reiterate
and confirm the statements, averments, and contentions made by
me in the plaint and verify the same to be true and correct.
I, therefore submit and pray to this Hon’ble Court that the suit be
decreed in my favour.
Advocates for the Plaintiff Plaintiff
12
WRITTEN ARGUMENTS
1. Whether the acceptance of a sum different than that in the contract was
valid and if it was then what was the effect of it on the original contract:-
● A contract for the purchase of kids wear garments was entered between R D
Parmanandka Pvt. Ltd. and Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd for the contract price of Rs.
6,00,000/-. Since this constitutes a valid contract, both the parties are bound to
perform their part of the contract and fulfil their promise.
● Both the buyer and the seller agreed on a payment schedule, wherein it was
decided that the buyer should pay the consideration amount on the date of
delivery of the clothes as specified in the terms of the contract.
● Soon it was realized by Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd that R D Parmanandka would be
unable to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 2,00,000/-. Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd
thereafter agreed with Parmananka Pvt. Ltd and was ready to accept Rs.
50,000/- instead of Rs. 2,00,000/- as per the agreed contract. In this view
Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd remitted a part of the consideration amount which was
payable by R D Parmanandka Pvt Ltd.
● Under Section 63 of The Indian Contract Act, 1872, a promisee can remit in
part, the performance of the promise made to him. Here, the acceptance of
Rs. 50,000/- was valid. Remission therefore means acceptance of a lesser
performance than what was actually due under the contract.The same has
also been explained by the Allahabad High Court in Siraj Nasreen v. Begum
Rani1.
2. Whether there was any breach of contract by Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd:-

● As per the contract, the consideration amount for the purchase of clothes was
Rs. 6,00,000/- . A partial sum of Rs.4,00,000/- was paid to Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd
on 1st January, 2017 and full and final settlement on the delivery of the
remaining clothes on 1st march, 2017.
● However, only a part delivery of clothes was supplied on 1st March, 2017 to R
D Parmanandka Pvt. Ltd. and the remaining delivery of clothes was supplied
on 3rd March, 2017. The clothes were to be supplied to the buyer upon the
agreed payment schedule which was 1st January, 2017.
● This is a breach of contract under Section 47 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872,
as Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd. breached to perform its part as per the terms of the
contract. If the date of the delivery of the clothes was agreed upon, the
promisor should perform the promise accordingly. The quality of the remaining
of the clothes delivered on 3rd March, 2017 was not up to the desired quality
1
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5e97442f4653d048ca2b597f
13
and standard and therefore were of poor quality. In spite of notices being sent
to Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd. for the exchange of the remaining clothes, the goods
were not exchanged. Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd has breached the terms of the
contract by not exchanging the clothes which on inspection were found to be
poor and inferior quality. The supply of poor quality clothes is a breach of
contract under 16(1) of Sale of Goods Act, 1930. The same is explained by the
Kerala High Court in Eternit Everest Ltd. vs Abraham. 2
3. Whether losses were accrued to the Plaintiff due to the breach:-

The Plaintiff accrued major loss due to the breach of contract by Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd.,
as there was a delay in the delivery of goods. As per the Contract, both the parties
agreed upon that all the goods will be delivered on 1st January, 2017, instead only
part delivery was made on the above date and the rest was delivered on 3rd March,
2017. R D Parmanandka Pvt. Ltd. suffered huge loss, as there was shortage of
goods for 2 months which resulted in decline of sale. Also the remaining goods
which were delivered on 3rd March, 2017, were of bad quality, which could not be
sold, the Plaintiff suffered monetary loss as well as reputation.
4. Whether the losses accrued to the plaintiff amounted to Rs.1,50,000:-

The Plaintiff suffered loss of sale and business for two months due to the late delivery
of all the goods by the Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd. Besides that, the rest of the goods when
delivered were found to be of poor quality and could not be sold, which amounted to a
loss equal to the amount paid for the poor quality products, as that amount could not
be recovered through sales. All these losses amounted to Rs.1,50,000. Also the poor
quality products occupied unnecessary space as they were not exchanged despite
the notice.
2
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/551309/
14
Exhibit A
COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT
15
16
17
18
Exhibit B
Copy of the Profit and Loss Statement of RD Parmanandka Pvt Ltd
19
Exhibit C
Copy of the Letter from Plaintiff to Defendant Regarding the Waiver of Rs 200000 dated 20th
February 2017
20
Exhibit D
Copy of Reply of Defendant dated 25th February 2017
21
Exhibit E
Copy of First Notice Dated 4th March 2017
22
Exhibit F
Copy of Second Notice Dated 20th March 2017
23
24
VAKALATNAMA
I, Ms. Rekha Jha, director of the Defendant company above named do hereby appoint
Stavan P.Telgote, Deepak Sachwani, Payal Lokwani Bhojwani, and Janvi Ahuja as
Advocates practicing in High Court, to act, Appear and plead for us in the above matter.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hands on this______ day of july 2017.
Accepted
Stavan P.Telgote
Deepak Sachwani
Payal Bhojwani
Janvi Ahuja
Advocates High Court
ISSUES
25
1. Whether the acceptance of a sum different than that in the contract
was valid and if it was then what was the effect of it on the original
contract?
2. Whether there was any breach of contract by Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd.
3. Whether losses were accrued to the plaintiff due to the breach
4. Whether the losses accrued to the plaintiff amounted to
Rs.1,50,000.
IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR

DIVISION, PUNE
Civil Suit No_____/2017
26
R.D Parmanandka Pvt. Ltd. ......Plaintiff

V/s
Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd. …..Respondent
WRITTEN STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
I, Stavan Telgote, advocate on record for Ms. Rekha Jha director of Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd.
having principal office at, Office No 407-408, Zenith complex 4th Floor, Opposite Krishi
Bhavan, Shivajinagar, Pune, Maharashtra 411005, do hereby state on solemn
affirmation as under :
1. Being duly authorized for the same, the present written argument is filed on
behalf of my client i.e. the Respondent in the case, Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd.
2. At the outset, it is submitted that all the allegations made in the Complaint are
false, invalid, illegal and such allegations are made to deliberately harass my
client and to supress true facts hence anything not accepted by my client shall
be consider denied.
3. My client further states that the Plaintiff has filed the Case U/s 74 and 26 of the
Indian Contract Act, read along with Code of Civil Procedure where the Opposite
Party have suppressed material facts with a malafide intention to gain unlawful
pecuniary advantage from my client consequent to which this present Complaint
is being admitted before this Hon’ble Court.
4. My client states that the plaintiff has filed this case deliberately to harass my
client and suppress the true facts.
5. Moreover, my client states that the facts stated in para 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 are true
and correct to my client’s knowledge.
6. With reference to para 6 my client denies the statement made in the said
paragraph which says that “The Plaintiff further submits that shortly after the
delivery of the consignment, profits for the Plaintiff company reduced
significantly which resulted in the Plaintiff company to suffer horrific losses due
to loss of profitable contract with its major booking agents.” is absolutely false
and concocted as the said statement is not supported by any documentary
27
evidence hence the case shall be dismissed as per section 23 of Indian
Evidence Act, 1872.
7. With reference to para 7 the statement of profit and loss are forged hence
inadmissible.
8. The facts stated in para 8 and 9 are true and correct to my client's knowledge.
9. With reference to para 10 my client denies the said allegations and further states
that if the consignment was of poor quality then you were bound to return it.
10. The fact stated in para 11 is true and correct to my client’s knowledge.
11. With reference to para 12 my client states that she was looking forward to
amicable settlement with respect to the said issue therefore if such notice/letter
would have been received by my client, she would have absolutely replied for
the same.
12. My Client submits that the plaintiff is approaching this court with an dishonest
intention to malign our company’s image in the business field. Therefore my
client is entitled to claim damages amounting to Rs.5,00,000 for the crime
committed by the opposite party under section 499 of Indian Penal Code by
initiating frivolous proceedings for defaming my client.
13. With the facts and circumstances mentioned herein in above the suit of the
plaintiff be dismissed with heavy cost.
28
VERIFICATION
I, Ms.Rekha Jha, director of the Defendant company above named, do hereby state and
declare on solemn affirmation that whatever stated hereinabove is true and correct to
my own knowledge.
Solemnly stated and declared at Pune (This ___day of July 2017 )
Before me
Identified by me
Stavan P.Telgote
Deepak Sachwani
Payal Lokwani Bhojwani
Janvi Ahuja
Advocate for the Defendant
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINT
29
I, Ms. Rekha Jha, having office at, Office No 407-408, Zenith complex 4th Floor,
Opposite Krishi Bhavan, Shivajinagar, Pune, Maharashtra:- 411005, do hereby solemnly
state as under:
That I have filed the above reply against the plaintiff for the reliefs as more particularly
set out in the Written Statement. I repeat, reiterate and confirm the statements,
averments, and contentions made by me in the plaint and verify the same to be true and
correct.
I, therefore submit and pray to this Hon’ble Court that the suit be decreed in my favour
Stavan P.Telgote
Deepak Sachwani
Payal Lokwani Bhojwani
Janvi Ahuja
Advocate for the Defendant
30
WRITTEN ARGUMENTS
1) Whether the acceptance of a sum different than that in the contract was
valid and if it was then what was the effect of it on the original contract?
1. The Defendant admits that he accepted a sum of Rupees Fifty Thousand
(50000) from the Plaintiff , but says that he delivered the goods on 3rd
March 2017.
2. The sum of acceptance of Rupees Fifty Thousand (50000) was accepted
in full satisfaction between the plaintiff and the defendant on the basis of
the difficulties faced by the plaintiff on account of losing a profitable order
from the third party.
3. As per the consensus between the parties, Defendants were considerate
enough to grant a discount of 1,50,000 to the plaintiff since the delivery of
the goods were made to plaintiff , that clearly shows the intent of the
defendant and he willfully complied with the said contract.
4. As per Section 50 of the Indian Contract Act , 1872 the defendant
discharged there duty by delivering the kids garments to the plaintiff which
makes the contract legally valid in the eyes of law.
2) Whether there was any breach of contract by Saptarangi Pvt Ltd?
1. Defendant is not liable for any damages cause to the plaintiff because the
defendants complied with delivery of the consignment.
2. As per the knowledge of the defendants , RD Parmanandka had lost a
profitable contract with its large booking agents which resulted in a
significant down in the demand of kids wear garments.
3. Therefore due to this reason the plaintiff cannot seek any damages from
the defendant.
4. As per the legal maxim of Caveat Emperor (let the buyer be aware )
means that the buyer relies on his knowledge and skill when he purchases
a particular product as he has a opportunity to verify and examine the
goods before placing the order or the delivery of the goods.
31
Since the plaintiff had verified and examined the kids garments before
placing the order, so the defendant should not be responsible for the
damages claimed by the plaintiff.
5. The defendant had fulfilled the said consignment on 3rd March , 2017 ,
therefore it was the duty of the plaintiff to verify the kids garments before
accepting the same from the defendant.
As per the terms and conditions of the defendants , in case the plaintiff
had pointed out any quality issues during the delivery of the goods then
the defendant would have willfully replaced the goods within the next day
itself.
6. The Defendant is a large manufacturer of kids garments and production of
kids garments takes place at a very large scale at various factories .
7. The defendant states that the quality standards for production of kids
garments would not specifically change for a particular order.
8. Since the defendant is facing many legal actions already , why would a
company will spoil its goodwill or reputation by doing such an act.
9. Therefore it is submitted by the defendant that the goods were of
good quality to the plaintiff, hence the defendant is not liable to pay any
compensation and damages to the plaintiff
3) Whether losses were accrued to the Plaintiff due to the breach ?
1. The Defendant states that no losses were accrued to the Plaintiff due to
the breach of contract.
2. According to the Defendant they have already informed to the Plaintiff that
due to the unavoidable circumstances which arose in the factory they will
not be able to supply those goods 1st March 2017 and delivered them on
3rd March 2017.
3. Plaintiff did not proof that the loss caused was due to quality of goods; also
Plaintiff did not return those goods to the Defendant. With reference to
para 10 of the paint which states “Due to the fact that the plaintiff company
32
was already suffering heavy losses….” To recovered from those losses a
desperate attempt was made to save the sinking ship.
4. All of our other clients don’t face any such issues. Therefore from the
above fact it is crystal clear that the goods were of good quality.
4) Whether the losses accrued to the plaintiff amounted to Rs.1,50,000 ?
1. It is humbly submitted that the Defendant is not liable for any losses caused
to the Plaintiff.
2. Since Saptrangi is a large manufacturer of kids wear garments they would
not have specifically changed their quality standards for production of a
certain lot of garment; which would have jeopardize its own reputation.
3. The legal maxim Caveat Emptor or let the buyer beware leads to the
presumption that a buyer relies on his skill of judgement when he purchases
a good; since he has the opportunity to examine the goods before
purchasing it.
4. It is humbly submitted that same has been held by the hon’ble court in
Ismail Allarahia v/s Dattatraya R. Gandhi, AIR 1916 BOM 2093
3
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1450222/
33

Breach of Contract Suit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Breach of Contract Suit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUIT FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT

1st Memorial Submitted to

Vivekanand Education Society’s

Sr. No PLAINTIFFS Roll No.

IN THE COURT OF CIVIL JUDGE, SENIOR DIVISION,

Civil Suit No____/ 2017

R.D Parmanandka Pvt. Ltd. ,

Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd.

Sr. No Contents Page No.

7 WRITTEN ARGUMENT 13-14

8 EXHIBIT “A” 15-18

13 EXHIBIT “F” 23-24

16 WRITTEN STATEMENT 27-28

19 WRITTEN ARGUMENTS 31-33

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have set my hands on this______ day of February 2021.

1. Whether the acceptance of a sum different than that in the contract

2. Whether there was any breach of contract by Saptrangi Pvt. Ltd.

3. Whether losses were accrued to the plaintiff due to the breach

4. Whether the losses accrued to the plaintiff amounted to

SUIT FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT UNDER

SECTION 74 OF THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT.

PLAINT FILED UNDER SECTION 26, READ

WITH ORDER NO VII, RULE 1 OF THE CODE OF

The Humble Application of the Plaintiff above named.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

It is submitted on behalf of the Plaintiff above mentioned as under:

Bank, Kothrud, Pune, Maharashtra 411029 is a garment company

specialising in ladies garments and is registered under The

Companies Act, 2013.

2. The Plaintiff company is represented through it’s Director, Mr.

in-charge of overseeing the affairs of the company, including sales.

3. The Defendant is also a company, having its registered office at,

Office No 407-408, Zenith complex 4th Floor, opposite Krishi

Bhavan, Shivajinagar, Pune, Maharashtra 411005 and specialises

4. The Defendant company is represented by its Director, Ms. Rekha

Jha and to the Plaintiff’s knowledge also manages the sales

division of the company overseeing its functions.

5. The Plaintiff company entered into a sale agreement with the

defendant company for the purchase of 6000 units of kids garments

totaling to an amount of Rs.6,00,000/-, which was to be delivered to

the factory of the Plaintiff on or before 1st January, 2017. Hereto

annexed and marked as “Exhibit A” is a copy of the sales

consignment, profits for the Plaintiff company reduced significantly

which resulted in the Plaintiff company to suffer horrific losses due

to loss of profitable contract with its major booking agents.

7. This resulted in the Plaintiff company to incur substantial damages

in profits as well as reputation. Hereto annexed and marked as

“Exhibit B” is a copy of the Plaintiff Company’s profit and loss

statement from 1.01.2017 to 15.02.2017.

8. Under these circumstances, the Plaintiff company wrote a letter

addressing the director of the company issue faced by the Plaintiff

and to request them to accept a payment of Rs.50,000/- as a final

payment of debts owed to the Defendant company by the Plaintiff.

Hereto annexed and marked as “Exhibit C” a copy of the letter

9. The Defendant agreed to accept the payment of Rs.50,000/- in a

letter addressed to Mr.Shashank Shinde; Director and

representative of the Plaintiff company for the purposes of this suit.

Hereto annexed and marked as “Exhibit D” is a copy of the reply

sent by the Defendant.

company was already suffering heavy losses, the abhorrent quality

of the kids garments would further cement the absolute demise of

the reputation and profit of the Plaintiff company. In order to control