Specific performance relief cannot be replaced by unclaimed compensation when no damages plea was made in the suit or by amendment.

Compensation in lieu of specific performance cannot be awarded unless it is claimed in the plaint or brought on record by amendment under Section 21(5) of the Specific Relief Act, and equitable considerations cannot override that statutory bar. The Supreme Court noted that no plea for damages or compensation had been raised in the suit, the appeal, or by amendment, even after expiry of the contract, and held that the claim was therefore not maintainable. Reliance on Section 73 of the Contract Act did not assist the claimant on these facts.

---

---

Issues: Whether damages or compensation could be granted in lieu of specific performance when no such relief was claimed in the plaint or by amendment, and the contract had already expired.

Analysis: The claim for damages was examined in the context of Section 21(5) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, which bars award of compensation unless it is claimed in the plaint, subject to amendment at any stage. The Court distinguished cases where compensation had been allowed because the amount was already ascertainable or had been properly brought on record, and noted that here no plea for damages or compensation had ever been raised in the suit, the appeal, or by amendment even after expiry of the contractual period. The Court also relied on the principles under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and held that the authorities cited did not assist the appellant on the facts.

Conclusion: Damages or compensation in lieu of specific performance could not be granted, and the claim was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: Compensation in lieu of specific performance cannot be awarded unless it is claimed in the plaint or introduced by amendment, and equitable considerations cannot override the express statutory requirement.

---