The policy of law of contract is to provide as much amount of compensation to the aggrieved as it has suuffered loss, and not an extra penny. It is also well-settled that law of contract is not to penalise the defaulter i.e. if the aggrieved party has not suffered real loss, he should not be granted compensation, although a nominal amount may be granted in recognition of breach of his legal right.
it is well settled proposition in case of breach of contract for suuply of goods, that if the supplier breaches the contract, the buyer shall be granted compensation on the basis of maket price theory, inspite of the fact that, in fact, the buyer has not bought the goods from the market and hence suffered no loss. Whether not it amounts to putting penalty upon defaulter and to grant the buyer for what he has not suffered. Is not it in contradiction of the very base of the contract act.
