TEAM

TEAM CODE: TC 18
CODE: TC18

VIDHITVA 2022:
FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

IN THE HON’BLE COMMERCIAL COURT OF NEW. ST JOSE,

AT XEVIA

CIVIL APPEAL NO. / 2022

UNDER SECTION 6 OF THE COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT, 2015 READ WITH SECTION 20(a)
OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN

XEVIA SPACE RESEARCH ORGANIZATION …. PLAINTIFF

VERSUS

AERO POWER XEVIA PVT. LTD …. DEFENDANT

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………………………3

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES………………………………………………………………...4,5

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION……………………………………..……………………6

STATEMENT OF FACTS………………………………………………………...…………..7

STATEMENT OF ISSUES ……………………………………………………..…………….8

STATEMENT OF ARGUMENTS……………………………………………...…………….9

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED………………………………………………………………..10

ISSUE 1: THE PRESENT SUIT IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE

COMMERCIAL COURT OF NEW ST. JOSE CONSIDERING SECTION 12A OF
COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT..................................................................10

[1.1] That the Commercial Court of New St. Jose has the Jurisdiction over
the present suit
……………………………………………………………………………...…….10

[1.1.1] Territorial jurisdiction……………………………………………...10

[1.1.2] Subject matter jurisdiction……………….…………………………10

[1.1.3] Pecuniary jurisdiction………………………………………....……10

[1.2] There was an urgent interim for XSRO……………..…...………….11,12

[1.2.1] National interest should be prioritized………………………..….…12

[1.3] that the plaintiff has locus standi before the Commercial Court of
New St. Jose...................................................................................................13

1
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

ISSUE 2: THERE IS A BREACH OF CONTRACT BY AERO POWER XEVIA PVT.

LTD ...........................................................................................................13

[2.1] Non-performance of contract leads to the breach of

contract…………………………………………………………………....…13,14

[2.1.1] Partial performance……………………………………………………….14

[2.2] Stipulation of time……………………………………………....…….14,15

[2.3] Delay in delivery.........................................................................................15

[2.4] No separate agreements or act or omission done to constitute the

discharge of contractual obligations...……………………………………..15,16

ISSUE 3: THE PLAINTIFF IS JUSTIFIED IN SEEKING THE ESTIMATED LOSSES

DUE TO THE BREACH OF CONTRACT........................................................16

[3.1] That XSRO should seek for damages …………………………….…..17

[3.2] Enforcement of the promise by an order for specific performance of

the contract…………………………………………….……….................17,18

PRAYER………………………………………………………………………..……………19

2
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Hon’ble Honourable

Govn. Government

Pvt. Private

Ltd. Limited

Cr. Crore

Co. Company

Ors. Others

Addl. Additional

& and

AIR All India Reporter

SCC Supreme Court Cases

v. versus

No. Number

Vol. Volume

3
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

CASE LAWS

1. Travellers Exchange Corporation ... v. Celebrities Management Private ... on 31

January, 2019
2. Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. v. KS Infraspace LLP & Ltd. (2020)
3. Hubtown Ltd. v. IDBI Trusteeship Service Ltd., 2016 SCC OnLine Bom 9019
4. M/s M.K. Food Products v. M/s S.H. Food Products (2019)
5. Samir Kasal v. Prashant Mehta & Ors on 19 January,
6. Mercator Oil and Gas Ltd. And ... v. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation ... on 3 June,
2019the bare act
7. Peters v. Parkway Mercury Sales Ltd, (1975)
8. Cutter v. Powell
9. Dhumee Behara v. Sevenoaks
10. MCD v. Jagan Nath Ashok Kumar, (1987)
11. Peeco Hydraulic Ltd v. East Angila Plastics (India) Ltd,
12. Hitkari Motors v. Attar Singh, AIR 1962
13. Associated Cineman of America, fac v. World Amusement Co, 1973
14. Hochster v. De La Tour
15. Purbanchal Cables & Conductors Pvt. Ltd. v. Assam State Electricity Board, (2012)
16. Damodar Valley Corpn. v. K.K. Kar, (1974)
17. Chrisomar Corporation v. MJR Steels Pvt. Ltd., (2018 )
18. Gopal krishan bhardia and ors v. Anoop singh

STATUTES REFFERED
1.The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908)
2. The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (4 of 2016)
3. The Commercial Courts (Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement) Rules, 2018
4. The Indian Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872)
5. The Specific Relief Act, 1963

4
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

BOOKS
1. AVATAR SINGH, LAW OF CONTRACT & SPECIFIC RELIEF, (12th Edition,
Eastern Book Company, 2017)
2. PULLOCK & MULLA, THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, (R. Yashod Vardhan,
15th Edition, LexisNexis Butterworth Wadhwa, 2018)
3. ANSON’S LAW OF CONTRACT, (28th Edition, J. Beatson, 2002)

OTHER AUTHORITIES
1. www.scconline.com
2. www.manupatra.com
3. https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/calcutta-high-court-s12a-commercial-courts-
act-commercial-suit-mandatory-pre-litigation-mediation-213332
4. https://rajyasabha.nic.in/rsnew/Committee_site/Committee_File/ReportFile/18/164
/117_2022_7_17.pdf
5. https://www.barandbench.com/amp/story/news/mediation-section-12a-
commercial-courts-act
6. http://student.manupatra.com/Academic/Maxims-and-Phrases/legal-maxims-
phrases-judgments.htm

5
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The counsel on behalf of the Defendant humbly submits before the jurisdiction of the
Commercial Court, New St. Jose in response to the suit filed by the plaintiff. The jurisdiction
is invoked under Section 6 of The Commercial Courts Act, 20151 read with Section 20(a) of
The Code of Civil Procedure,19082. It is further submitted that all procedural requirements
have been adhered to in the prescribed manner.

The present, memorandum set forth the facts, contentions and arguments.

1
Jurisdiction of Commercial Court.
2
the defendant, or each of the defendants where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of
the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain;
6
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

STATEMENT OF FACTS

PART A

Aero Power Xevia Pvt. Ltd. Has been the leading manufacturer of durable batteries having
registered office at New St. Jose, the capital of Xevia. The Co. uses lithium composite sheets
which even functions in space. Also, govt. of Xevia, on 14th Jan 2021 launched its third Mars
mission led by XSRO under Addl. Director of XSRO. The mission was already delayed, so
an urgent notification by XSRO on 9th Sep 2021 invited tenders for the supply of 64 space
proof battery sets within 4 months with the estimated cost of Rs. 15 Cr per set. Three bids
were received on 9th oct out of which aero powers was sent a letter of award and on 12th oct
the co submitted Rs. 15 Cr as security deposit. Terms: 16 batteries were to be delivered
within a month and rest 48 over next 3 months.

PART B

Accordingly, 16 batteries were delivered on 7th Nov 2021. Request for payment was made
and approved on 8th Nov and 13th Nov by Aero Powers and Addl. Director respectively.
Another batch of batteries were delivered on 5th Jan 2022. On 10th Jan 2022, a notification
was passed by Central Government of Xevia regarding escalation of tax duties on import of
lithium by 300%. Since Aero Power imported lithium from other countries, the Co. on 14th
Jan 2022 informed the custom officials that the tax slab should not be applicable on their
goods as it is of aluminium and only have 0.5 mm thin layer of lithium.

On 2nd Feb 2022, the company sent an email suggesting increment of price by 25% per
battery and declared that it won't be able to deliver the remaining batteries by 30th Feb 2022
as it is in deep financial loss due to escalation in custom duties and non-payment by XSRO.
On 3rd Feb 2022, Aero Power said that the Co. must deliver within 4 months as there is no
price escalation clause in the agreement. So, violating it would lead to the Breach of Contract
on behalf of Aero Power. Also, mentioned that the battery must be delivered by 30th Feb
2022 otherwise it will jeopardize the space mission and there would be the loss of Rs. 5 cr per
day for each day of the delay. Lastly, remaining batteries were not delivered to XSRO.

PART C

The Legal Representatives of XSRO filed a suit against Aero Powers for breach of Contract.
7
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

ISSUE 1

WHETHER THE PRESENT SUIT IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL

COURT OF NEW ST. JOSE CONSIDERING SECTION 12A OF COMMERCIAL COURTS
ACT?

ISSUE 2

WHETHER THERE WAS A BREACH OF CONTRACT BY AERO POWER XEVIA PVT.

LTD.?

ISSUE 3

IN CASE OF BREACH, WHETHER THE PLAINTIFF IS JUSTIFIED IN SEEKING THE

ESTIMATED LOSSES?

8
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

ISSUE 1: THAT THE SUIT IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL

COURTS OF ST. JOSE

The counsel on behalf of the petitioner humbly submits that the suit is maintainable before
the Commercial Court considering section 12A of Commercial Court Act. Firstly, [1.1]
Commercial Court of St. Jose has the jurisdiction over the present suit. Secondly, [1.2] Present suit
falls within the “urgent interim relief” under section 12A Of Commercial Court Act. Thirdly, [1.3] It
has the locus standi before he Commercial Court.

ISSUE 2: THAT THERE WAS A BREACH OF CONTRACT BY AERO POWER

XEVIA PVT. LTD.

The counsel on the behalf of the petitioner humbly submits that there was a breach of contract
by Aero Power Pvt. Ltd. Firstly, [2.1] there was non-performance of contract. Secondly, [2.2]
there was Stipulation of time. Thirdly, [2.3] that there was Delay in delivery. Lastly, [2.4] No
separate agreements or act or omission done to constitute the discharge of contractual
obligation.

ISSUE 3: THAT DUE TO BREACH OF CONTRACT, THE PLANTIFF IS

JUSTIFIED IN SEEKING THE ESTIMATED LOSSES

The counsel on the behalf of the petitioner humbly submits that every breach of contract
entitles the injured party for compensation. Firstly, [3.1] can Seek damages for the loss he or
she has suffered. Secondly, [3.2] obtain the enforcement of the promise by an order for
specific performance of the contract.

9
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 1: THAT THE SUIT IS MAINTAINABLE BEFORE THE COMMERCIAL COURT

OF NEW ST. JOSE CONSIDERING SECTION 12A OF COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT

It is most humbly and respectfully submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the suit is
maintainable before the Commercial Court on the following grounds:

1. Commercial Court of New St. Jose has the jurisdiction over the present suit.
2. Present suit falls within the urgent interim relief under section 12A Of Commercial Court
Act3.
3. It has the locus standi before the Commercial Court.

[1.1] That the Commercial Court of New St. Jose has the Jurisdiction over the present
suit

It is humbly submitted that the Commercial Court has the jurisdiction over the present
suit as the jurisdiction of Civil Courts can be divided on the basis of pecuniary,
Territorial and subject matter.

[1.1.1] Territorial jurisdiction

Section 20(a) of Civil Procedure Court read with section 6 (explanation of Commercial
Court Act) states that the territorial jurisdiction as the suit may be instituted either in a place
where the defendant resides or carries on business or in a place where the cause of action has
arisen, i.e., where the dispute or wrong took place. So, in the present case the defendant has
its registered office at New St. Jose, the capital of xevia. In the case of Travellers Exchange
Corporation ... v. Celebrities Management Private ...4 on 31 January, 2019 the
applicant/defendant is that since the registered office of the applicant/defendant is at Mumbai
and the cause of action if any of the plaintiffs, besides at New Delhi as claimed, has also

3
Pre-Institution Mediation and Settlement.
4
Travellers Exchange Corporation Limited & Others v/s Celebrities Management Private Limited · CS(COMM)
No. 51 of 2016
10
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

accrued at Mumbai, in terms of Sanjay Dalia supra, the suit could have been filed at Mumbai
alone and not in this Court.

[1.1.2] Subject matter jurisdiction

Section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure is related to the stage challenging the jurisdiction.
It can be well established that in the given suit filed before the Court has the valid contract in
the abovementioned case and was free from any dispute while the subsequent execution of
the contract the Commercial dispute arose. Section2(c) “Commercial dispute” means a
dispute arising out of––2c(i) ordinary transactions of merchants, bankers, financiers and
traders such as those relating to mercantile documents, including enforcement and
interpretation of such documents; 2c(xviii) agreements for sale of goods or provision of
services. Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. v. KS Infraspace LLP & Ltd. (2020)5 and
Hubtown Ltd. v. IDBI Trusteeship Service Ltd.6, 2016 SCC OnLine Bom 9019 the Court held
the only disputes which actually answers the definition of ‘Commercial dispute’ as provided
under section 2(1)(c) of Commercial Court act, 2015 must be entered by the Commercial
Courts.

[ 1.1.3] Pecuniary jurisdiction

Section 12 of Commercial Courts Act, 20157 deals with specified value. At least three lakh
rupees (amount to be notified by the central government) for Commercial dispute. In this suit
the amount was more than 3 lakh rupees as cost of each set was Rs 1.5Cr8.

[1.2] there was an urgent interim for XSRO

Section 12A(1) states that where there is urgent interim relief, a party is not
required to exhaust the remedy of mediation, which itself shows that the provision
is not mandatory. It is humbly submitted before the Court that the suit is

5
Civil Appeal No(s). 9346 of 2019
6
Hubtown Limited vs Idbi Trusteeship Service Limited 2016 SCC ONLINE BOM 9019
7
Determination of Specified Value.
8
Moot para 2
11
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

maintainable before the Commercial Court of St. Jose as the suit needs speedy
disposal as it will seriously jeopardize the space mission for which the losses
would be around an estimated amount of Rs.5Cr per day of the delay. Also the
mission had only a year left for the completion of the mission as it was already
delayed because of covid and so the urgent notification was released by my client
through which tenders were invited for the supply of battery sets within 4 months9
and estimated cost of each set was 1.5cr.

The expression ‘urgent interim relief’ is best reflected from the debate on the
Amendment to the Act itself, which was passed by the Lok Sabha on 1st August,
2018.

In Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. v. KS Infraspace LLP & Ltd. (2020) 10the
plaintiff was suffering an irreparable loss and wanted an immediate interim relief, due
to which the Madhya Pradesh High Court suggested initiating Court proceedings
rather than resorting to the mediation process. Also, in M/s M.K. Food Products v.
M/s S.H. Food Products (2019)11, the Telangana High Court observed that the suit
qua permanent injunction restraining the defendant from infringing a copyright was
‘urgent in nature,’ and the parties could not be referred to mediation. In Samir Kasal
v. Prashant Mehta & Ors on 19 January12, the plaintiff had no occasion to initiate
pre-institution mediation in keeping with sub-section (1) of Section 12A of the
Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Since the suit contemplated extremely urgent
relief, the plaintiff could not be asked to approach the Mediation Centre before
coming to Court.

[1.2.1]National interest should be prioritized.

The present scenario was of national as on 14th Jan 2021 the govt of Xevia launched its
third mars mission led by the XSRO13. Space missions are the growing ambition for any
country .and as mentioned the team had only a year left for the completion of the mission.

9
Moot para 10
10
(Civil) No(s). 23194 of 2019)
11
CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.3690 of 2018
12
Samir Kasal vs Prashant Mehta & Ors on 19 January, CS(COMM) 39/2022
13
Moot para 2
12
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

The national interest of the country should be considered as a urgency or should be

prioritized. And as the mission will be delayed it will cost losses for each day which
would amt to 5cr per day which would be a great loss for a nation.

[1.3] that the plaintiff has locus standi before the Commercial Court of New St. Jose

locus standi means any party who suffers some damage or injury from the act of a private
individual or of the state can approach the Court. Essentials of locus standi are:

• Presence of injury
• Causation
In the given suit my client has suffered a monetary loss which is a proof of injury and
it has happened because of aero power Pvt. Ltd. as the defendant did not deliver the
consignment at the stipulated time.

ISSUE 2: THERE WAS A BREACH OF CONTRACT BY AERO POWER

XEVIA PVT. LTD.

It is most humbly and respectfully submitted before this Hon’ble Court that there was a
breach of contract by Aero Power Xevia Pvt. Ltd. As:

1. There was non-performance of contract

2. Stipulation of time
3. Delay in delivery
4. No separate agreements or act or omission done to constitute the discharge
of contractual obligation

Section 39 of the Indian Contract Act, 187214 gives out the concept of “breach of contract”.
Although this Section doesn’t use the term breach of contract, yet the conditions set out form
the basis of a breach of contract.

[2.1] Non-performance of contract leads to the breach of contract

14
. Effect of refusal of party to perform promise wholly.
13
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

Breach of contract is a legal cause of action and a type of civil wrong, in which a binding
agreement or bargained-for exchange is not honoured by one or more of the parties to the
contract by non-performance or interference with the other party’s performance. A breach
occurs when a party to a contract fails to fulfil its obligation(s), whether partially or wholly,
as described in the contract, communicates an intent to fail the obligation, or otherwise
appears not to be able to perform its obligation under the contract.

Similar to the suit it was held in case of Mercator Oil and Gas Ltd. and Ors. v. Oil and
Natural Gas Corporation ….15On 3rd June, 2019 the bare act for non-performance of the
contract leads to breach of contract and as here, the Co. mailed that under no circumstance it
would be able to deliver the remaining batteries before 30th Feb 2022.however they did not
deliver the consignments before the deadline. It was also held in another case Peters v.
Parkway Mercury Sales Ltd, (1975)16.

[2.1.1] Partial performance

Completion of the contract and the price is usually required to discharge the contract. No
completion, No fee. This rule was established in Cutter v Powell17 is obviously capable of
causing injustice. Held: The woman failed the action. Payment is made on condition that he
worked on the ship in Liverpool, because he does not fulfil this condition, the widow is entitled
to nothing. Taking the case as precedent here, Aero Power has not completed the contractual
obligation and other consignments of batteries were received by XSRO18. There was only the
partial delivery which itself mean that it was not completion of the contract. This was also held
in Dhumee Behara v. Sevenoaks19 (1886) I.L.R. 13 C. 80, the plaintiff lost all right to wages
for the 11 months and 20 days during which he actually worked. The principle of the rule as
stated in the English cases is that the contract must be deemed an entire indivisible contract
and the performance of the services for the whole time agreed upon was in the nature of a
condition precedent to the right to recover even a portion of the wages.

[2.2] Stipulation of time

15
Civil Appeal No. 2042 of 2022.
16
10 N.B.R.(2d) 703; 4 A.P.R. 703 (C.A.),
17
6 TR 320; 101 ER 573.
18
Moot para 11
19
Dhumee behara v sevanoaka
14
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

The performance must be completed upon the precise date specified, otherwise the contract
might to be brought to an end. Section 47 of Indian Contract Act,187220 Time and place for
performance of promise, where time is specified and no application to be made also section 48
of ICA,187221 Application for performance on certain day to be at proper time and place.

“Time is of the essence” is a legal phrase used to specify the time period in which one party
must complete its contractual obligations to the other party. Failure to meet deadlines set in a
contract “of the essence” clause results in a breach of contract.

As in the present scenario when urgent notification was released through which tenders were
invited and there the time was mentioned four months.it was also mentioned in the agreement
that out of 64 batteries to be delivered, in which 16 were to be within one month and the rest
were to be delivered over next 3 months22. MCD v. Jagan Nath Ashok Kumar, (1987)23 where
a specific date is mentioned for the completion of the contract. In commercial contracts time
is ordinarily of the essence of the contract China Cotton Exporters v. Beharilal Ramcharan
Cotton Mills Ltd24, AIR 1961 SC 1295. Followed in Peeco Hydraulic Ltd v. East Angila
Plastics (India) Ltd25, (1987). This is so because the business world requires certainty Hitkari
Motors v. Attar Singh, AIR 196226.

[2.3] Delay in delivery

When one party in a contract does not fulfil his or her contractual duties by the performance
deadline, the other party can hold the breaching party liable for contract breach.

However, the guilty party might express his or her willingness to still perform the contract. In
this case, the decision to allow him or her to fulfil the contract will depend on whether time
was of the essence in the contract.

If time was indeed an essential factor, failure to meet contractual obligations by the specified
deadline is considered a breach of contract due to delay.

20
Time and place for performance of promise, where time is specified and no application to be made.
21
Application for performance on certain day to be at proper time and place.
22
Moot para 4
23
AIR 2316, 1988 SCR (1) 180.
24
1961 AIR 1295
25
0 CALLT 551 HC, 92 CWN 453
26
1959 SCR Supl. (1) 928
15
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

A breach of contract occurs when a party thereto renounces his liability under it, or by his
own act makes it impossible that he should perform his obligations under it or totally or
partially fails to perform such obligation (Associated Cineman of America, fac v. World
Amusement Co, (1973)27. Similarly in the present case defendant declared that he won't be
able to deliver other batteries under any circumstances by 30 Feb although the company knew
that it was urgent to be delivered within 4 months:

In Hochster v De La Tour28 the services of the plaintiff has to start from 1st June. But the
defendant informed on 11th May that he does not require the services anymore. The court
held that the plaintiff is entitled to me for damages before 1st June. Defendant is liable for
breach as due to the delay space mission was hampered and XSRO faced the loss of 5Cr per
day of day

[2.4] No separate agreements or act or omission done to constitute the discharge

of contractual obligations

In certain cases, the contractual obligations are discharged by novation Purbanchal Cables &
Conductors Pvt. Ltd. v. Assam State Electricity Board, (2012)29, rescission. Damodar Valley
Corpn. v. K.K. Kar, (1974)30 and alteration Chrisomar Corporation v. MJR Steels Pvt. Ltd.,
(2018)31 of contract and in those cases the obligation of the original contract need not be
performed In the instant matter, none of the above acts were done so to discharge the
contractual obligations of the respondent and therefore, there was a failure in discharge of
obligation of the Aero Power Pvt. Ltd.

ISSUE3: THAT THIS IS A CASE OF BREACH, THUS THE PLANTIFF IS

JUSTIFIED IN SEEKING THE ESTIMATED LOSSES

27
201 Minn. 94, 276 N.W. 7 (Minn. 1937)
28
[1853] EWHC J72 (QB)
29
2012 7 SCC 462
30
1974 AIR 158, 1974 SCR (2) 240
31
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1930 OF 2008
16
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

It is most humbly and respectfully submitted before this Hon’ble court that there was a
breach of contract by Aero Power Xevia Pvt. Ltd. and so the plaintiff is justified in seeking
the estimated loss.

When a party performing a contract does not do so to the standard required by a contract or
within the time frame set, that party will breach the contract. Every breach of contract entitles
the injured party

• Seek damages for the loss he or she has suffered.

• Obtain the enforcement of the promise by an order for specific performance of the
contract.

[3.1] That XSRO should seek for damages

“Ubi jus, ibi remedium”, meaning that where there is a right there is a remedy. Whenever a
breach of contract takes place, the remedy of ‘damages’ is the one that comes to mind
immediately as the consequences of breach. section 73 of ica,187232 says that when a
contract has been broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive, from the
party who has broken the contract, compensation for any loss or damage caused to him
thereby, which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach, or which the
parties knew, when they made the contract, to be likely to result from the breach of it.

Damages in case of contracts of sale of goods: in case a party breaks a contract for sale of
goods, the aggrieved party must take a quick action to protect itself.

in the present suit, Aero Power Xevia Pvt. Ltd. does not perform its obligated performance
and not delivered and breached the contract and because of which the the plaintiff is suffering
5Cr each day as loss.33 Hence it is humbly requested that the plaintiff is entitled to get
damages as it was an actual breach of contract and because of the non-delivery my plaintiff is
bearing each day a loss of 5Cr along with the delay in the space mission. In gopal krishan
bhardia and othsrv anoop singh34 as in this case also the defendant breached the contract and
was asked for the compensation.

32
Compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract. Compensation for failure to discharge
obligation resembling those created by contract
33
Moot para 10
34
2014 C.R.P. No.103/2013
17
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

[3.2] Enforcement of the promise by an order for specific performance of the contract

In certain cases of breach of a contract, damages may not be an adequate remedy. Then the
Court may direct the party in breach to carry out his promise according to the terms of the
contract.

Chapter 2 of the Specific Relief Act, 196335 lays down detailed rules on the specific
performance of Contracts. Section 10 of specific relief act,196336 states that ‘cases in which
specific performance of contract enforceable’

The defendant clearly said that under no circumstances it would be able to deliver the
remaining batteries before 30th Feb 2022 as non-performance is leading to serious jeopardize
the space mission37. It is needed for the nation that the mission does not get hampered and the
third mars mission get successful launched. Thus, the counsel on the behalf of the plaintiff
humbly request that the court pass order for special performance of their past promise.

35
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACTS
36
Specific performance in respect of contracts.
37
Moot para 9
18
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF
 VIDHITVA 2022: FRESHER’S MOOT COURT COMPETITION

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities

cited, the Counsel on behalf of the Defendant requests this Court to adjudge and declare that:

1. That the suit is maintainable before the Commercial Court of New St. Jose
considering Section 12A of Commercial Courts Act.
2. That there was the breach of contract by Aero Power Xevia Pvt. Ltd.
3. That the plaintiff is justified in seeking the estimated losses

That XSRO is entitled to claim damages.

That the defendant is enforced to perform the promise by an order of specific

performance of the contract.

And/Or

Pass any other order, which it deems fit in the interests of Justice, Equity

and Good Conscience-

ALL OF WHICH IS MOST HUMBLY AND RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED ON

BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF

Sd/-

….……………………………….

(Counsel for the 'Plaintiff’)

Place: New St. Jose

Dated:

19
MEMORIAL FOR THE PLAINTIFF