It is not superfluous to add that the box "realization of the purchase undertaking" (or similar ones) also appears in other parts of clause 6 of the program contract, and in all the places where it is used the context (also verbal, and not just the substantive one) that it refers to the demand for realization presented by Heckbalan. On the other hand, it emerges that whenever the program contract relates to the purchase of the apartments by the State, it is done in a different language ("performance of the purchase undertaking", "the date of purchase", etc.).
- A reading of the provision of section 6(h)(3), in attributing the aforesaid linguistic meaning to the licensing of the section, leaves no room for doubt that the deduction provision in the appendix relates only to a case in which the contractor's demand for the realization of the purchase obligation is presented to the State after the end of the execution period. The deduction from the calculated price, which is instructed in the section, is clearly intended to spur the contractor to present his demand – which he is entitled, as recalled, to present already at the end of the construction of the frame and partitions ("Stage 18") – no later than the end of the execution period. This provision, which relates to projects of the second type, is clearly the equivalent of its predecessor (the provision of section 6(h)(2)), which directs a reduction in the calculated price, in projects of the first type, due to the suspension of the realization demand by the contractor for more than eighteen months after the end of the execution period.
The interpretation proposed by the State, as the learned judge has already noted, has no basis in the language of section 6(h)(3), in which the expression "delay in execution" (or a similar expression) does not appear at all. In view of the obligatory comparison of the wording of the section with the wording of section 6(g), which indeed deals with the contractor's delay in completing the construction work on time, and for this purpose uses the explicit words "delay in execution" – the absence of a similar expression from section 6(h)(3) cannot be coincidental.