PRAHLAD CHANDRA DE Vs. SIRAJUL HAQUE CHOWDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs. Their suit, being Title Suit No. 151 of 1967 and Title Appeal No. 102 of 1976 have been dismissed by the Courts below.

(2.) THE plaintiffs-appellants filed a suit for specific performance of contract and/or damages along with other consequential reliefs. The plaintiffs' case inter alia is that the defendants were the owners of a house which was rented to them and the said house was gutted by fire in the year 1963. Thereafter the present defendants as plaintiffs filed a Title Suit being No. 17 of 1963 for ejectment of the present plaintiffs. In due course the parties in the said Suit came to a settlement and the terms of the settlement were recorded in a compromise deed or "Sulehnama" on 24-7-1963 and the same was submitted to the said Court trying the said suit and the trial Court disposed of the suit in terms of the said compromise deed and passed a decree in terms thereof. The plaintiffs' case is that the defendants, who were bound to construct the house providing three rooms for the three defendants, were not done in accordance with the terms of the compromise deed nor the kitchens (cook-shed) were constructed accordingly. The construction of the house and the kitchens was not done within the stipulated period of six months. The defendants also failed to construct the latrine situated behind the house meant for the common use of the plaintiffs. According to the plaintiffs the compromise deed contained reciprocal promises by both the parties to the said suit and that the plaintiffs performed all the obligations contained in the said compromise deed in terms thereof whereas the present defendants could not (1) construct the house in terms of the compromise deed; (2) failed to construct accordingly the kitchens, and the latrine was not at all constructed. The plaintiffs averred that they were and are always willing to fulfil their part of the terms of the compromise deed where for the plaintiffs in terms of the compromise are entitled to take recourse to the help of the Court directing the defendants to build the house in accordance with the terms and conditions of the deed in question or in the alternative the plaintiffs claimed that they should be awarded with the damages or compensation for the loss sustained by them for the breach and also for the loss sustained by them due to the default of the defendants. They also prayed for other reliefs which are not relevant for the purpose of the appeal.

(3.) THE following issues were settled by the Court: