TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of SC dismissed appeal concerning liquidated damages claim under plant machinery delivery contract. Court held appellant's claim for Rs.107.54 lakhs was not based on Clause 21 (warranty breach) but sought refund of equipment costs. Since appellant retained machinery without invoking replacement clause, damages were limited to express contractual provisions per Section 74 of Contract Act. HC correctly rejected Rs.68.15 lakhs claim for equipment cost refund. Appellant only entitled to stipulated liquidated damages for specified breaches including delivery delays, performance failures in fermentation plant, steam, and power guarantees. Claim remains confined to contractually agreed damages.
TaxTMI 
