As per case facts, appellants participated in a tender process for road construction and were declared successful bidders, receiving work orders. However, they failed to enter into formal agreements as ... required by the work orders and public works manual. Despite this, they incurred expenses by hiring equipment, expecting site handover. A significant portion of the proposed road fell within forest land, leading to delays in site clearance. They pursued various government departments to resolve these impediments, claiming to have suffered losses due to the delay. They filed suits for compensation. The question arose whether a valid contract existed between the appellants and the Roads and Bridges Department, making the department liable for compensation, and whether Section 21 of the Specific Relief Act could be applied for compensation without a prayer for specific performance. Finally, the High Court affirmed the Commercial Court's decision that no valid contract was formed because the appellants did not execute the required agreements, rendering the work orders conditional and ultimately cancelled. The court held that actions taken by appellants, such as hiring equipment, were at their own risk without a complete contract. Consequently, without a valid contract, the issues of specific performance or compensation under Section 21 did not arise, and the appeals were dismissed.