(1.) The facts which have given rise to this appeal are briefly these: It appears that the plaintiffs who are a limited Company were in need of premises for their office in 1920, as they were under an obligation to leave the premises which they had been occupying then. They obtained a lease of certain premises in the Tamarind Lane in 1920 but the lease was executed in August 1920. Subsequently the defendant in this case agreed to take up these premises from them. It is not necessary to set forth v the facts about this lease in detail; but owing to certain differences between the parties in respect of the agreement as regards the lease of the premises in the Tamarind Lane, the plaintiff s. filed the present suit against the defendant in which they claimed various reliefs against the defendant with reference to that agreement. It appears, however, that the plaintiffs were not satisfied with the premises in the Tamarind Lane, and the defendant was in a position to secure to them suitable premises in the Nawab Building on the Hornby Road. With reference to that there was correspondence between the parties, and as a result of that correspondence, there was an agreement between the parties to the effect that the defendant was to procure to the plaintiffs the lease. for occupation of the premises in the Nawab Building which were at the time occupied by the Central Bank of India, Limited. In substance the defendant agreed to get those premises vacated by the bank and to secure the same for ten years to the plaintiffs in consideration of their paying the standard rent Rs. 225 per month and of their agreeing to pay Rs. 2225 per month for a period often years making a total of Rs. 2,73,000 to the defendant for his trouble in securing the premises to the plaintiffs.
(2.) The defendant contested the plaintiffs claim in the suit and made a counter- claim in respect of his agreement with them in respect of the Nawab Building. He claimed specific performance of the agreement contained in the letters to which I shall presently refer, and for damages and compensation as may be just for breach of the agreement. He claimed Rs. 2,73,000 as representing the proper damages payable to him.
(3.) The plaintiffs filed their written statement in reply to the counter-claim of the defendant; and when the suit came on for hearing twenty-five issues were raised as representing the various contentions between the parties.