Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: consequential damage in M.G. Natesa Chettiar vs The Madras State Electricity Board, By ... on 14 October, 1966Matching Fragments
7. To come to the substantial point the agreement provides that the consumer shall pay to the Government for electric energy supplied at the rates given in the schedule in accordance with the terms of the agreement and that the minimum rates specified should be paid irrespective of whether energy to that extent has been consumed or not. The monthly minimum whether electricity is consumed or not, is fixed at Rs. 29-2-8. The argument of learned Counsel is that the agreement must be read as a contract for supply of electric energy at specified rates and that the minimum charge is a penalty for breach of the agreement to consume energy. It is, therefore, argued that the plaintiff can claim only compensation for breach under Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, that Section 74 of the Contract Act would apply and that the minimum charge fixed is only the maximum compensation that the plaintiff would be entitled to : in law the plaintiff cannot claim anything more than reasonable compensation for the breach : and he must establish the loss or damage consequential on the non-consumption of electricity by the defendant and claim only that amount.