TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. TABLE OF CONTENT ……………………………………1

2. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………….2
3. INDEX OF AUTHORITY…………………………………..3
I. Table of cases
II. Books
III. Websites
4. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION………………………..4
5. STATEMENT OF FACT…………………………………...5
6. STATEMENT OF ISSUE…………………………………..6
7. SUMMERY OF ARGUMENT………………………….….7
8. ARGUMENT ADVANCE………………………………….8
9. PRAYER…………………………………………………... 14
 LIST OF ABBREVIATION

SL. NO. ABBREVIATION FULL FORM

1 & And
6 Hon’ble Honorable
7 No. Number
8 Props. Proposition
9 SC Supreme Court
10 SCC Supreme Court Cases
11 Supl. Supplement
12 v. Versus
 INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

CASES

Bhagwandes Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s Girdharilal Parshottamdas and co

Sadhoo Lal Motilal v. The State of MP. 1971

Quadrin Pvt. Ltd. v. Bajrang Alleys Ltd. (AIR 2008 Bom 38)

BOOKS AND COMMENTARIES

Law of Contract

LEGAL WEBSITES

ruwanthikagunaratne.wordpress.com

https://blog.ipleaders.in/
 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The plaintiff has approached this Hon'ble court under section 9 of civil procedure code,1908 in the form of a
civil application in civil court.

Section 9 of CPC-Courts to try all civil suits unless barred-

The Courts shall (subject to the provisions herein contained) have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature
excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred.

Explanation I-A suit in which the right to property or to an office is contested is a suit of a civil nature,
notwithstanding that such right may depend entirely on the decision of questions as to religious rites or
ceremonies.

Explanation 2-For the purposes of this section, it is immaterial whether or not any fees are attached to the office
referred to in Explanation I or whether or not such office is attached to a particular place.
 STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Mr Raghu was running a business at Bhubaneswar.

2. He was looking to purchase a piece of land for establishing a marriage hall in Bhubaneswar.

3. Mr. Raghu identified a piece of land, measuring 1 acre, situated at Plot No-521 Mouza- Raghunathpur,
Bhubaneswar, belonging to Mr Niladri,who was looking for a prospective buyer for his land.

4 .On 15.06.2022,Mr Raghu sent a letter to Mr Niladri asking if he was willing to sell the above land and
solicited the lowest price for its sell.

4. On 23.06.2022,Mr Niladri replied through the letter the lowest price to be Rs 45,00,000/- but didn't state if he
was willing to sell it or not.

5. Mr Raghu again issued a letter on 03.07.2022 in favour of Mr Niladri stating that he was ready to buy the
land situated at Plot no- 521 Mouza- Raghunathpur, Bhubaneswar for the sum of Rs 45,00,000/- as quoted by
Mr Niladri.

7. Mr Niladri remains silent and refused to sell the property.

 STATEMENT OF ISSUES

1. Whether there was a contract between both the parties was valid as per Indian contract Act, 1872.

2. Whether their breach of contract done by Mr. Niladri was as per the Indian contract Act 1872.

3. Whether Mr. Raghu is entitled to get damage as per Indian contract Act 1872.
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT

1. Whether there was a contract between both the parties was valid as per Indian contract Act, 1872.

It is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble court, defendant ( Mr. Niladri) offer is valid offer under section 2(a)
of Indian contract Act 1872 and the acceptance communicated by the plaintiff (Mr. Raghu) is also valid under
section 2(b) of Indian contract Act.

2 Whether their breach of contract done by Mr. Niladri was as per the Indian contract Act 1872.

It is humbly submitted before this Hon'ble court, the refuse to an offer is not valid as per the provisions of the
Indian contract Act, as it is not done as per the provision of section 5 i.e Revocation to offer under Indian
contract Act 1872.

3 Whether there was any breach of contract on behalf of defendant as per the Indian contract act. 1872 and
whether plaintiff is entitled to get damages for breach of contract.

It is humbly submitted before the Hon'ble court, there was breach of contract on behalf of Mr. Niladri as Mr
Raghu is ready to fulfill his obligation but the Mr. Niladri has revoked the contract against the provision of
Indian contract Act 1872 and therefore plaintiff is entitled to get damage from Mr. Niladri.
 ARGUMENT IN ADVANCE

1. Whether there was a contract between both the parties was valid as per Indian contract Act,
1872.

It is humbly submitted before the hon'ble court, the offer given by the defendant is valid offer under sec. 2(a) of
The Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Indian Contract Act, 1872 prescribes the law relating to contracts in India
and is the key act regulating Indian contract law. The Act is based on the principles of English Common Law. It
is applicable to all the states of India. It determines the circumstances in which promises made by the parties to
a contract shall be legally binding. Under Section 2(h), the Indian Contract Act defines a contract as an
agreement which is enforceable by law.

Sec 2(a) of Indian Contract Act, 1872 defines an offer as, "a proposal made by one person to another to do an
act or abstain from doing it." The person who makes the offer is known as the promisor or offeror or and the
person to whom an offer is made is known as the promise or the offeree. Determination of an Offer (Test of an
offer) - Every proposal made by an offeror is not legally regarded as an offer. Three tests are applied to
determine whether or not an offer has actually been made.

1. Does create a legal relationship?

It is essential for a valid proposal that it must be made with the intention of creating a legal relationship
otherwise it will only be an invitation. A social invitation may not create a social relationship. An offer must
lead to a contract which creates legal obligations and legal consequences in the case of non-performance of the
contract.In the given case,Mr Raghu has a clear intention to create a legal relation with Mr Niladri by giving his
assent to buy the property at quotation price.
2. Are terms of offer clear and definite?

Knowledge of the Intention of the parties is very essential as without this the courts will not be able to decide
what the parties want to do. Therefore, the terms of the offer must be clear and definite and not vague and loose.
In this case the terms of the offer were very clear and definite for both the parties. Mr.Raghu wanted to buy the
property of Mr Niladri at the lowest price of Rs 45,00,000/-

3 Whether the offer is communicated or not?

Communication or expression of the willingness by the offeror to enter into a contract or abstain from doing so
is essential for a valid offer. Mere desire or willingness to do or not to do something is not enough and will not
agree for an offer. In this case the entire communication & the formation of the contract was done through a
letter, the offer was communicated and also the acceptance was. Hence in the present case all the requisites of
valid offer are being fulfilled hence it was a valid offer. And the acceptance communicated by Mr. Raghu is
also valid under section 2(b) of The Indian Contract Act, 1872. A contract comes into being acceptance of an
offer. See 2(b) of Indian Contract Act states "When the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his
assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted, proposal when accepted becomes a promise"

Thus, acceptance of the offer must be absolute and unqualified. It cannot be a condition. In the given case Mr
Raghu acceptance through letter was absolute and unqualified and the requisites of a valid acceptance are being
fulfilled hence it was a valid acceptance. Sec 4 of The Indian Contract Act-Communication of Acceptance.

The communication of an acceptance is complete

(i)as against the proposer, when it is put in the course of transmission to him, so as to be out of the power of the
acceptor.

(ii)as against the acceptor, when it comes to the knowledge of the offeror.

As per the clause the communication of an acceptance is complete as against the proposer who in present case
is Mr Niladri , when it was put in the course of transmission to him ( on 3 .07.2022) so as to be out of the
power of Raghu ( the acceptor) and as against Mr Raghu when it comes to the knowledge of Niladri.
 Therefore, both the Offer and Acceptance are valid as per the provisions of The Indan Contract Act in the
present case and hence it formed a valid contract between Mr Raghu and Mr Niladri and both are bound to
fulfill their obligation.

The Supreme Court in Bhagwandes Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s Girdharilal Parshottamdas and co has
held that Section 4 of the Contract Act is only applicable in cases of non-instantaneous forms of communication
and would not apply when instantaneous forms of communication are there. The Court observed that the
Contract Act did contemplate the use of instantaneous means of communications. Hence, where proposal and
acceptance are made by instantaneous mode of communications like telephone, telex,fax etc , the postal rule
does not apply and the contract is made where the acceptance is received. Since the Supreme Court has held in
the present case that contract is formed right when the communication is received so in the given case since the
facts are identical decision of Supreme court can be used as a precedent.

Although, in the case of Quadrin Pvt. Ltd. v. Bajrang Alleys Ltd. (AIR 2008 Bom 38) The Bombay High

Court ruled that the normal one would apply and the contract would be completed only when the acceptance

was received by the offer. It was held that Bombay High court that communication is completed when

acceptance is received by the offeror, so in the given case to the acceptance was completed
2.Whether the breach of contract done by Mr Niladri was as per the Indian contract Act 1872.

It is humbly submitted before the Honourable court, the revocation of offer is not valid as per the provisions of
The Indian Contract Act, as it is not done as per the provision of Section 5- Revocation of offer under Indian
Contract Act,1872.

Revocation- Where an offer gives the offeror an option to accept within a fixed period, it may be withdrawn
even before the expiry of that period unless there is some consideration.

Modes of revocation of Offer

A proposal revoked

(1) by the communication of notice of revocation by the proposer to the other party.

(2) by lapse of the time prescribed in such proposal for its acceptance, or, no time

prescribed, by the lapse of a reasonable time, without communication of the acceptance

(3) by the failure of the acceptor to fulfill a condition precedent to acceptance; or

(4) by the death or insanity of the proposer, if the fact of his death or inanity comes to the

knowledge of the acceptor before acceptance

According to Sec 5 of The Indian Contact Act, 1872 proposal may be revoked at any time before the
communication of its acceptance is complete as again the proposer, but

In the present case the acceptance was already communicated to Mr. Niladri by the Mr. Raghu through letter
therefore after acceptance Mr. Niladri cannot revoke the offer as per section 5 of The Indian Contract Act.1872.

Therefore, the revocation of offer done by Mr. Niladri in the present case is not valid as per the Indian Contract
Act, 1872 and as Mr Raghu has accepted the offer and is ready to fulfill his obligation then Mr. Niladri is also
bound so fulfill his obligation and cannot just revoke his offer to get away from his obligation.
In the case Sadhoo Lal Motilal v. The State of MP. All the tender that was presented by the party to the
respective Government was accepted later. But a telegram was subsequently sent to that respective Government
withdrawing the acceptance. The court found the strong evidence of the conclusion of the contract and could not
find any reason to revoke the contract. The reason is that as soon as the letter of acceptance was posted, the
sender contract was concluded. Thus, revocation could not be made. As in this case it has been stated that as
soon as acceptance is posted, the contract is formed so also in this case the same precedent can be used to
consider that the contract was firmed when the telex was received.

3 Whether there was any breach of contract on behalf of defendant as per the indian contract act. 1872
and whether plaintiff is entitled to get damages for breach of contract.

It humbly submitted before the Hon'ble court, there was breach of Contract on behalf of defendant as it is a
valid contact and the Plaintiff is ready to fulfill his obligation but the defendant has revoked the contract against
the provisions of The Indian Contract Act, 1872 and therefore Plaintiff is entitled to get damages from the
Defendant. Section 73 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872

Compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract-When a contract has been broken, the party who
suffers by such breach is entitled to receive, from the party who has broken the contract, compensation for any
loss or damage caused to him therby, which naturally arose in the unusual course of thing from such breach, or
which the parties knew, when they made the contract, to be likely to result from the breach of it- When a
contract has been broken, the party who suffers by such reach is entitled to receive, from the party who has
broken the contract, compensation for any loss or damage caused him thereby, which naturally arose in the
usual course of things from such breach, or which the parties knew, when they made the contract, to be likely to
result from the breach of it- "Such compensation is not to be given for any remote and indirect loss or damage
sustained by reason of the breach
Compensation for failure to discharge obligation resembling those created by contract. When an obligation
resembling these created by contract has been incured and his not been discharged, any person injured by the
failure to discharge it is entitled to receive the same compensation from the party in defence, as if such person
had contracted to discharge it and had broken his contract-When an obligation resembling those rated by
contract has been incurred and has not been discharged, any person injured by the failure to discharge it is
entitled to receive the same compensation from the party in default, as if such person had contacted to discharge
it and had broken his contract. Therefore, under section 73 of The Indian Contract Act, 1872 it clearly states that
whenever any party to contract denics to fulfill their obligation due to which the other party suffers theloss, the
party who suffers loss specifically because of non-performance of other party obligation, the party who suffered
loss is entitled to get maintenance from the other party.

Hence in the present case as there is a valid contract between Mr Raghu (Plaintiff )and Mr Niladri (Defendant),
and the Planiff is ready to fulfill his obligation but as the defendant has not fulfilled his obligation as he has
wrongly revoked the offer against the Indian Contract Act the defendant will suffer as he won't get property for
marriage hall which becomes his legal right ariving out of the contract which will be reached and therefore the
Plaintiff is entitled to get damages for breach of legal right arising one of the contract from the Defendant.

PRAYER
WHEREFORE IN THE LIGHT OF THE ISSUES RAISED, ARGUMENTS ADVANCED AND
AUTHORITIES CITED, IT IS HUMBLY REQUESTED THAT THIS HONORABLE COURT MAY BE
PLEASED TO ADJUDGE AND DECLARE:

1. THAT THE OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE BETWEEN THE PLAINTIFF AND THE DEFENDANT WAS
VALID AND THEREFORE IT IS A VALID CONTRACT UNDER THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872.

2. THAT THE REVOCATION OF OFFER DONE BY THE DEFENDANT WAS NOT VALID AS PER
PROVISIONS OF THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872

THEREFORE THE CONTRACT CANNOT BE REVOKED.

3. THAT THERE WAS BREACH OF CONTRACT ON PART OF DEFENDANT AND THE PLAINTIFF IS
ENTITLED TO GET DAMAGES OR AN ORDER SHOULD BE PASSED AGAINST THE DEFENDANT
TO FULFIL HIS PART OF OBLIGATION.

AND/OR

PASS ANY SUCH ORDER, WRIT OR DIRECTION AS THE HONORABLE COURT DEEMS FIT AND
PROPER FOR THIS THE PLANTIFF SHALL DUTY BOUND PRAY.

COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER