There remains the question of the amount of damages. The plaintiff was clearly entitled to sue at his option either for specific performance or for compensation for breach of contract or for both. He has chosen to sue for compensation. It has been pointed out in 40 Mad. 338, 38 Cal. 455 and 32 Bom. 165 that the law of India in respect of breaches of contract for the sale of immovable property differs from that of England and that the ordinary rule laid down in Section 73 of the Contract Act applies to such breaches. The Calcutta and Bombay cases also lay it down that the measure of damages ordinarily should be the difference between the contract price and the market value at the date of breach though it is remarked in 32 Bom. 165 that each case has to be considered on its own merits.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF LAHORE
Decided On: 10.04.1923
Appellants: Akhtar Beg and others
Vs.
Haq Nawaz, Advocate, High Court Lahor Haq Nawaz, Advocate, High Court Lahore, Bashir Ahmed, Bar-at-law, son and legal representative of the Hon'ble Mr. Muhammad Shah Din, C.J.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Campbell and Moti Sagar , JJ.
Citation: 78Ind. Cas.87,(1924)Lah709
