Thamel v. Fernando and Others – sllr 2001 volume 2 page 044

In the case between Thamel (plaintiff) and Fernando and others (defendant), the court addressed the issue of whether specific performance could be granted when the agreement did not expressly provide for such a remedy, and whether damages constituted an adequate substitute for specific performance. The holding determined that where contractual provisions stipulate a fixed sum for default and do not mandate specific performance, damages are to be treated as an adequate remedy. This reaffirmed the principle that specific performance is a discretionary remedy, and should not be awarded where damages suffice under the contract. Reliance was placed on established authorities including Thakeer v. Abdeen and principles articulated by C. G. Weeramantry, emphasizing that court intervention through