Malik MUHAMMAD RIAZ vs MUHAMMAD HANIF Ss — 2022 SCMR 1572 SUPREME-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Malik MUHAMMAD RIAZ VS MUHAMMAD HANIF Ss. 12, 19 & 54---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VI, R. 1 & O. XIV, R. 1---Contract Act (IX of 1872), S. 73---Suit for specific performance of contract for service, damages and permanent injunction---Defendant engaged the appellant (plaintiff) to demolish an old building structure and construct a new plaza/building thereon---Appellant alleged in the plaint that he had almost completed 80% work of construction of the Ground Floor and 30% of the First Floor; that appellant forwarded a bill to the defendant for payment of Rs.52,01,500/- but the defendant refused to pay the same---According to the terms and conditions of agreement and the schedule of payment incorporated therein, the appellant prayed for a decree in the sum of Rs.70,10,500/- out of which, a sum of Rs.52,10500/- was for construction charges and Rs.15,00,000/- for the raw-material lying at the building site plus Rs.300000/- as demolishing charges of old structure---In addition, the appellant also claimed the damages to the tune of Rs.70,00,000/- on account of irreparable losses, mental agony and severe financial losses---Trial Court decreed the suit with the directions to the defendant to pay a sum of Rs.70,10,500/- as balance construction charges in view of the agreement and a further sum of Rs.70,00,000/- as damages---Judgment and decree of Trial Court were affirmed in appeal, however vide impugned judgment, the concurrent findings of the Trial Court as well as the first Appellate Court were set aside by the High Court and the suit filed by the appellant was dismissed---Held, that so far as principal amount of Rs.52,10500/- as outstanding charges of construction was concerned, it appeared from the record that this amount was rightly decreed in favour of the appellant, being an outstanding amount that could not be turned down and which was also established through evidence---So far as the claim of 15,00,000/- as cost of raw-material lying at the building site and the claim of damages was concerned, no specific issues were settled by the Trial Court and no specific findings were available on record except that such sum was decreed as compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract in terms of section 73 of Contract Act, 1872---Survey of prayer clauses as incorporated in the plaint for the relief of damages, showed that it was somewhat a mix of special and general damages claim but no convincing evidence was adduced to the effect of sustaining any serious financial losses, even no evidence was adduced with regard to the alleged irreparable losses or mental agony---Neither any issue was framed nor at any point of time, the appellant applied for framing any additional issue nor any evidence was led for substantiating the claim of damages (special or general both) or to justify the claim of cost of material allegedly lying at the building site---Appeal was allowed with the consequence that suit of appellant was decreed in the sum of Rs.52,10500/- only. Head NotesCase Description

Malik MUHAMMAD RIAZ vs MUHAMMAD HANIF Ss — 2022 SCMR 1572 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 SCMR