UNIT-1 CONTRACT-I -Indian Contract Act, 1872

UNIT-I

Question:-Define ‘Contract‘ and ‘agreement’ as per Section 2, and explain the key differences.

Definition of ‘Contract’ and ‘Agreement’ as per Section 2 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

• Contract: As per Section 2(h), a contract is “an agreement enforceable by law.” It is a legally binding arrangement that creates obligations enforceable through legal processes, provided it meets the essential requirements outlined in Section 10, such as free consent, lawful consideration, and competent parties.
• Agreement: As per Section 2(e), an agreement is “every promise and every set of promises, forming the consideration for each other.” It is a broader concept, involving mutual promises where one party’s offer, when accepted, forms a promise supported by consideration.

Key Differences

Aspect	Contract	Agreement
Definition	An agreement enforceable by law (Section 2(h)).	A promise or set of promises forming consideration (Section 2(e)).
Scope	Narrower; only agreements meeting legal requirements (e.g., lawful object, free consent) are contracts.	Broader; includes all mutual promises, whether enforceable or not.
Enforceability	Legally binding and enforceable in a court of law.	May or may not be legally enforceable (e.g., social agreements).
Essentials	Requires essentials under Section 10 (competent parties, lawful consideration, etc.).	Does not require legal enforceability; mutual promises suffice.
Example	A written lease agreement enforceable in court.	A promise to meet a friend for dinner (not legally enforceable).

Explanation

An agreement is the foundation of a contract, but not all agreements are contracts. For instance, social or domestic arrangements (e.g., promising to attend a family event) are agreements but lack legal enforceability, thus not contracts. A contract, however, must satisfy additional criteria under Section 10, such as lawful object and consideration, making it actionable in law. This distinction is crucial, as seen in cases like Balfour v. Balfour (1919), where a domestic agreement was not a contract due to lack of intention to create legal relations.

Question- What constitutes a valid offer under Section 2(a)? Discuss with reference to Lalman Shukla V. Gauri Dutt.

What Constitutes a Valid Offer Under Section 2(a) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872?

Section 2(a) defines an offer (or proposal) as: “When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal.”

Essentials of a Valid Offer

Based on Section 2(a) and judicial interpretations, a valid offer must have the following characteristics:

1. Expression of Willingness: The offeror must clearly express their readiness to undertake or refrain from an action. This can be express (in words) or implied (by conduct).
2. Intention to Obtain Assent: The offer must be made with the purpose of seeking the other party’s agreement, distinguishing it from mere invitations to treat (e.g., advertisements or price lists).
3. Communication to the Offeree: The offer must be communicated to the intended recipient, as an offer cannot be accepted unless the offeree is aware of it (Section 4).
4. Definiteness and Certainty: The terms of the offer must be clear and capable of creating legal obligations, as vague or ambiguous offers are invalid.
5. Capability of Creating Legal Relations: The offer must be made with an intention to create a legal relationship, not for social or domestic purposes.
6. Not an Invitation to Offer: Offers must be distinguished from invitations to offer, such as displaying goods for sale or issuing tenders, which invite others to make offers.

Additional Requirements

• The offer must comply with any specific legal requirements, such as being lawful (not against public policy or law).
• It can be made to a specific person (specific offer) or to the public at large (general offer), as seen in cases like Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893).
• The offer must be capable of acceptance, meaning it remains open until revoked, lapsed, or rejected (Sections 5-6).

Discussion with Reference to Lalman Shukla V. Gauri Dutt (1913) 11 ALL L.J. 489

Case Overview

In Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt, the defendant’s nephew went missing, and the defendant sent the plaintiff, Lalman Shukla (a servant), to search for him. Subsequently, the defendant announced a reward of Rs. 501 for anyone who found the boy. Lalman, unaware of this reward, located the boy and later claimed the reward upon learning of it. The Allahabad High Court ruled that Lalman was not entitled to the reward.

Application to Section 2(a)

The case illustrates the critical requirement of communication of the offer for it to be valid and enforceable:

• Lack of Knowledge of the Offer: Lalman was unaware of the reward offer when he found the boy. Under Section 2(a), an offer must be communicated to the offeree to be valid, as it requires the offeror’s willingness to be signified to the other party. Since Lalman did not know about the reward, his act of finding the boy could not be considered an acceptance of the offer.
• No Intention to Accept: A valid offer requires the offeree’s assent to the proposal. Lalman’s actions were performed as part of his duty as a servant, not in response to the reward offer. Thus, there was no meeting of minds, a prerequisite for a contract.
• General Offer Principle: The reward was a general offer (open to the public), but for such offers to be accepted, the acceptor must have knowledge of the offer and act with the intention of accepting it, as established in cases like Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. In Lalman’s case, the absence of knowledge negated the formation of a contract.

Key Legal Principle from the Case

The court emphasized that for a contract to arise, the offeree must be aware of the offer at the time of performing the act constituting acceptance. This aligns with Section 4, which states that the communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made. The case underscores that an offer, to be valid under Section 2(a), must be effectively communicated to the intended offeree.

Conclusion

A valid offer under Section 2(a) requires a clear expression of willingness, communication to the offeree, intention to create legal relations, and definiteness, among other essentials. The Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt case highlights the necessity of the offeree’s knowledge of the offer for a contract to form, reinforcing that without communication, an offer cannot lead to a binding agreement. This principle is fundamental in contract law, ensuring that agreements are based on mutual consent and awareness.

Question-Explain the rules regarding the communication of acceptance as per Section 4.

Rules Regarding the Communication of Acceptance as per Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, outlines the rules governing when the communication of a proposal (offer), acceptance, and revocation is deemed complete. Specifically, for the communication of acceptance, it provides clear guidelines to determine when an acceptance becomes binding on both parties. The relevant provisions for acceptance are as follows:

Text of Section 4 (Pertaining to Acceptance)

“The communication of an acceptance is complete:

• As against the proposer: When it is put in a course of transmission to him, so as to be out of the power of the acceptor.
• As against the acceptor: When it comes to the knowledge of the proposer.”

Explanation of Rules for Communication of Acceptance

1. Completion Against the Proposer (Offeror):

• The communication of acceptance is complete against the proposer when the acceptor puts the acceptance in a course of transmission (e.g., by posting a letter, sending an email, or dispatching a messenger) in a manner that is beyond the acceptor’s control.
• At this point, the proposer is bound by the contract, as the acceptance has been communicated effectively, even if the proposer has not yet received it.
• Example: If A offers to sell goods to B, and B posts a letter accepting the offer, the acceptance is complete against A when the letter is posted, assuming it is correctly addressed and stamped. This is known as the Postal Rule, established in cases like Adams v. Lindsell (1818), which is referenced in Indian contract law.

1. Completion Against the Acceptor:

• The communication of acceptance is complete against the acceptor when the proposer receives or becomes aware of the acceptance.
• This means the acceptor is bound by the contract only when the acceptance reaches the proposer or comes to their knowledge.
• Example: In the above scenario, B (the acceptor) is bound when A receives the letter or learns of the acceptance. If the letter is lost in transit and never reaches A, the acceptance is not complete against B, though it may still bind A if properly posted.

1. Mode of Communication:

• The acceptance must be communicated in the manner prescribed by the proposer, if any, or by a usual and reasonable method, as per Section 7. If no mode is specified, the acceptor may use any reasonable means (e.g., post, telegram, or email, depending on the context).
• For instantaneous methods like telephone or email, communication is generally complete when the acceptance is received by the proposer, as seen in cases like Entores Ltd. v. Miles Far East Corporation (1955).

1. Silence Does Not Constitute Acceptance:

• Section 4, read with Section 7, implies that acceptance must be actively communicated. Silence or inaction by the offeree does not constitute acceptance unless the proposer has agreed to treat silence as acceptance, as clarified in Felthouse v. Bindley (1862).

1. Time and Place of Contract Formation:

• The contract is formed when the acceptance is complete against the proposer (i.e., when the acceptance is dispatched in non-instantaneous communication or received in instantaneous communication).
• The place of contract formation is typically where the acceptance is dispatched (e.g., the post office for a letter) for non-instantaneous methods or where the proposer receives it for instantaneous methods.

Key Points and Implications

• Binding Nature: Once acceptance is complete against the proposer, a contract is formed, and neither party can revoke it unless mutually agreed or legally permitted.
• Non-Instantaneous vs. Instantaneous Communication:
• For non-instantaneous methods (e.g., post), the Postal Rule applies, making acceptance effective upon dispatch.
• For instantaneous methods (e.g., phone, email), acceptance is effective only when received, as the communication is immediate.
• Lost Communication: If an acceptance is properly dispatched but lost (e.g., a letter lost in the mail), the proposer may still be bound, but the acceptor is not unless the proposer acknowledges receipt.
• Revocation of Acceptance: Under Section 5, an acceptance can be revoked if the revocation reaches the proposer before the acceptance becomes complete against the proposer (i.e., before dispatch in the case of postal communication).

Illustrations

1. Postal Rule Example: A sends an offer by letter to B on January 1, which B receives on January 3. B posts an acceptance letter on January 4, correctly addressed. The acceptance is complete against A on January 4 (when posted), binding A. It is complete against B when A receives the letter, say on January 6.
2. Instantaneous Communication Example: If A offers via email and B replies with an acceptance email, the acceptance is complete against both A and B when A receives the email, assuming it is sent to the correct address.

Judicial Precedents

• Adams v. Lindsell (1818): Established the Postal Rule, where acceptance by post is complete upon posting, influencing Indian contract law under Section 4.
• Entores Ltd. v. Miles Far East Corporation (1955): Clarified that for instantaneous communication (e.g., telex), acceptance is complete when received by the proposer.
• Bhagwandas v. Girdharilal & Co. (1966): The Supreme Court of India held that acceptance by telephone is complete only when the proposer hears it, aligning with instantaneous communication principles.

Conclusion

Section 4 provides a structured framework for the communication of acceptance, distinguishing between when it binds the proposer (upon dispatch in non-instantaneous methods) and the acceptor (upon receipt by the proposer). The rules ensure clarity in contract formation, particularly in distinguishing between instantaneous and non-instantaneous communication methods. Understanding these principles is essential for determining the moment and place of contract formation, as well as the rights and obligations of the parties involved.

Question-Define ‘consideration’ as per Section 2(d), and discuss its importance in contract formation,Covers consideration, essential for enforceability.

Definition of ‘Consideration’ as per Section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

Section 2(d) defines consideration as:
“When, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee or any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise.”

Breakdown of the Definition

• At the Desire of the Promisor: The act or abstinence must be undertaken at the request or wish of the promisor (the person making the promise).
• By the Promisee or Any Other Person: Consideration can be provided by the promisee or a third party, meaning it need not come directly from the party benefiting from the promise.
• Act, Abstinence, or Promise: Consideration can be:
• An act (doing something, e.g., delivering goods).
• An abstinence (refraining from doing something, e.g., not suing).
• A promise (committing to do or not do something in the future).
• For the Promise: The consideration must be given in exchange for the promise, forming the basis of the mutual obligation.

Example

If A promises to pay B Rs. 500 for painting a house, and B paints the house at A’s request, B’s act of painting is the consideration for A’s promise to pay Rs. 500, and A’s promise to pay is the consideration for B’s act.

Importance of Consideration in Contract Formation

Consideration is a fundamental element of a valid contract under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, as it ensures that contracts are based on mutual obligations. Its significance in contract formation can be discussed as follows:

1. Essential for Enforceability (Section 10):

• Section 10 states that for an agreement to be a contract, it must be made with lawful consideration, among other essentials (e.g., free consent, competent parties). Without consideration, an agreement is generally not enforceable by law, rendering it a mere promise or gratuitous undertaking.
• Exception: Section 25 allows certain agreements without consideration to be enforceable, such as those made out of natural love and affection (in writing and registered), promises to compensate for past voluntary services, or promises to pay time-barred debts.

1. Evidence of Mutual Obligation:

• Consideration represents the “price” or value exchanged for the promise, ensuring both parties have a stake in the contract. It reflects the principle of reciprocity, where each party gives something to receive something in return.
• For example, in a sale contract, the buyer’s payment is consideration for the seller’s delivery of goods, and vice versa, binding both parties.

1. Distinguishes Contracts from Gifts:

• Consideration differentiates a legally binding contract from a gratuitous promise (e.g., a gift). A promise to give something without receiving anything in return lacks consideration and is not enforceable unless it falls under Section 25 exceptions.
• Case Example: In Currie v. Misa (1875), consideration was defined as a benefit to the promisor or detriment to the promisee, emphasizing its role in creating enforceable obligations.

1. Ensures Intention to Create Legal Relations:

• The presence of consideration indicates that the parties intend their agreement to have legal consequences. Social or domestic agreements (e.g., promising to host a dinner) typically lack consideration and are not enforceable, as seen in Balfour v. Balfour (1919).

1. Flexibility in Form:

• Consideration need not be monetary; it can be an act, abstinence, or promise, as per Section 2(d). This flexibility allows a wide range of agreements to qualify as contracts, provided the consideration is lawful and real.
• Case Example: In Chinnaya v. Ramaya (1882), a mother promised to pay her daughter an annuity, and the daughter’s agreement to refrain from claiming certain property was held as valid consideration, even though it came from a third party.

1. Lawful Consideration (Section 23):

• For consideration to support a contract, it must be lawful, meaning it should not be forbidden by law, fraudulent, immoral, or against public policy (Section 23). Unlawful consideration renders the contract void.
• Example: An agreement to pay for committing a crime has unlawful consideration and is void.

1. Adequacy Not Required:

• The Act does not require consideration to be adequate (equal in value to the promise), as long as it is real and lawful. This principle, rooted in freedom of contract, allows parties to determine the value of their exchange.
• Case Example: In Adequacy of Consideration Cases, courts have upheld contracts where nominal consideration (e.g., Rs. 1) was given, as long as it was agreed upon willingly.

1. Privity of Contract:

• Section 2(d) allows consideration to move from the promisee or “any other person,” which is broader than English law’s requirement that consideration must move from the promisee. This enables third parties to provide consideration, strengthening the enforceability of contracts in India.
• Case Example: In Chinnaya v. Ramaya, the court upheld a contract where consideration was provided by a third party, illustrating this principle.

Additional Notes

• Past Consideration: Under Indian law, past consideration (an act done before the promise but at the promisor’s desire) is valid, unlike English law. For example, a promise to pay for services already rendered voluntarily is enforceable under Section 25(2).
• Executory and Executed Consideration:
• Executory: A promise to do something in the future (e.g., promising to deliver goods later).
• Executed: An act already performed at the time of the promise (e.g., delivering goods immediately upon agreement).
• No Consideration, No Contract (General Rule): As per Section 25, agreements without consideration are void unless they fall under specified exceptions, reinforcing consideration’s centrality.

Conclusion

Consideration, as defined under Section 2(d), is the backbone of contract formation, ensuring that agreements are based on mutual exchange and enforceable by law. It distinguishes contracts from non-binding promises, reflects the parties’ intention to create legal obligations, and provides flexibility in the form of exchange (act, abstinence, or promise). Its importance lies in guaranteeing reciprocity, legality, and enforceability, making it indispensable for valid contracts under the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The principle that “no consideration, no contract” (subject to Section 25 exceptions) underscores its critical role in contract law.

Question:-Under what circumstances can an offer be revoked according to Section 5?

Circumstances Under Which an Offer Can Be Revoked According to Section 5 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

Section 5 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, governs the revocation of proposals (offers) and acceptances. It states:

• “A proposal may be revoked at any time before the communication of its acceptance is complete as against the proposer, but not afterwards.”
• Additionally, it notes that an acceptance may be revoked before its communication is complete as against the acceptor, but this response focuses on the revocation of an offer as requested.

Rules for Revocation of an Offer (Section 5)

Under Section 5, an offer can be revoked under the following circumstances:

1. Before Communication of Acceptance is Complete Against the Proposer:

• An offer can be revoked at any time before the acceptance is put into a course of transmission to the proposer, so as to be out of the acceptor’s control (as per Section 4).
• Example: If A offers to sell goods to B by letter, and B has not yet posted the acceptance letter, A can revoke the offer. However, once B posts the acceptance (making it complete against A per the Postal Rule), revocation is no longer possible.
• Key Point: The critical moment is when the acceptance becomes binding on the proposer, typically when the acceptor dispatches the acceptance (e.g., posts a letter) or communicates it instantly (e.g., via phone or email).

1. Communication of Revocation:

• The revocation must be communicated to the offeree before the acceptance is complete. Section 4 specifies that the communication of revocation is complete:
  • As against the proposer: When it is put into a course of transmission to the offeree, so as to be out of the proposer’s control.
  • As against the offeree: When it comes to the offeree’s knowledge.
• Example: If A sends a revocation letter to B before B posts the acceptance, and B receives or learns of the revocation before accepting, the offer is effectively revoked.

Additional Circumstances for Revocation (Section 6)

While Section 5 sets the timing for revocation, Section 6 complements it by specifying the circumstances under which an offer lapses or is deemed revoked. These are relevant to understanding the broader context of revocation:

1. By Notice of Revocation:

• The proposer can revoke the offer by expressly communicating the revocation to the offeree before acceptance.
• Example: A offers to sell a car to B and later sends an email withdrawing the offer before B accepts. The offer is revoked if B receives the email before accepting.

1. By Lapse of Time:

• An offer lapses if not accepted within the time prescribed in the offer or, if no time is specified, within a reasonable time.
• Example: A offers to sell goods to B, stating the offer is open until June 10. If B does not accept by June 10, the offer is automatically revoked.

1. By Failure of the Acceptor to Fulfill a Condition Precedent:

• If the offer is subject to a condition (e.g., B must provide a bank guarantee), and the condition is not fulfilled, the offer lapses.
• Example: A offers to lease property to B on the condition that B submits a security deposit by a certain date. If B fails to do so, the offer is revoked.

1. By Death or Insanity of the Proposer:

• The offer lapses if the proposer dies or becomes insane before acceptance, provided the offeree learns of this before accepting.
• Example: If A offers to sell goods to B and dies before B accepts, the offer is revoked if B is aware of A’s death.

1. By Acceptance Not in the Prescribed Manner:

• If the proposer specifies a mode of acceptance (per Section 7) and the offeree does not comply, the proposer may treat the offer as lapsed by informing the offeree within a reasonable time.
• Example: A requires acceptance by registered post, but B accepts by email. A can revoke the offer by notifying B of the non-compliance.

Key Points and Implications

• Timing is Critical: The revocation must occur before the acceptance becomes binding on the proposer (per Section 4). Once acceptance is dispatched (in non-instantaneous communication) or received (in instantaneous communication), the offer cannot be revoked.
• Communication Requirement: Revocation is effective only when it reaches the offeree or is brought to their knowledge, ensuring fairness and clarity.
• General Offers: For general offers (e.g., rewards to the public), revocation must be communicated through the same medium as the offer, with reasonable publicity, as seen in cases like Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893).
• Irrevocable Offers: Certain offers, such as those supported by consideration (e.g., an option contract) or under specific statutes, may not be freely revocable. However, Section 5 applies to standard offers without such conditions.

Judicial Precedents

• Byrne v. Van Tienhoven (1880): Established that revocation is effective only when communicated to the offeree before acceptance. A revocation sent but not received before acceptance was held ineffective, aligning with Section 4 and Section 5.
• Henthorn v. Fraser (1892): Reinforced the Postal Rule, where acceptance is complete upon posting, making revocation impossible after the acceptor posts the acceptance letter.

Practical Example

A sends an offer to B on June 1 to sell a house, stating it is open until June 5. On June 3, A sends a revocation letter. If B receives the revocation on June 4 and has not yet accepted, the offer is revoked. However, if B posts an acceptance letter on June 3 before receiving the revocation, the acceptance is complete against A, and the revocation is ineffective.

Conclusion

Under Section 5, an offer can be revoked at any time before the communication of acceptance is complete against the proposer, typically when the acceptance is dispatched (for non-instantaneous methods) or received (for instantaneous methods). Section 6 further outlines circumstances like notice, lapse of time, failure of conditions, or death/insanity of the proposer that cause an offer to lapse. Effective communication of revocation to the offeree is essential, ensuring that both parties are aware of the offer’s status before a contract is formed. These rules promote clarity and fairness in contract formation under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

Question- List and briefly explain the essentials of a valid contract as per Section 10.

Essentials of a Valid Contract as per Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, states:
“All agreements are contracts if they are made by the free consent of parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and are not hereby expressly declared to be void.”

Based on this section, along with judicial interpretations and standard contract law principles, the essentials of a valid contract are as follows:

1. Agreement (Offer and Acceptance):

• There must be a lawful offer by one party and its acceptance by the other, forming an agreement as defined under Section 2(e) (a promise or set of promises forming consideration for each other).
• Explanation: The offer must be clear, definite, and communicated (Section 2(a)), and the acceptance must be absolute and unqualified (Section 7). For example, A offers to sell a car for Rs. 5 lakh, and B accepts the offer unconditionally, forming an agreement.
• Source: Indian Contract Act 1872 Notes – jkshahclasses.com.

1. Free Consent (Section 14):

• Consent of both parties must be free, meaning it is not caused by coercion (Section 15), undue influence (Section 16), fraud (Section 17), misrepresentation (Section 18), or mistake (Sections 20-22).
• Explanation: Free consent ensures that parties enter the contract willingly and with full understanding. For instance, if A forces B to sign a contract under threat, the consent is not free, and the contract is voidable.
• Source: Indian Contract Act 1872: Important Definitions – toppr.com.

1. Competent Parties (Sections 11-12):

• The parties must be competent to contract, meaning they must be of the age of majority (18+, per the Indian Majority Act, 1875), of sound mind (capable of understanding the contract’s effects, Section 12), and not disqualified by law (e.g., not declared insolvent).
• Explanation: A contract with a minor or a person of unsound mind is void. For example, a contract by a 16-year-old to buy property is not valid.
• Source: Law of Contracts Notes – lawbhoomi.com.

1. Lawful Consideration (Sections 2(d), 23):

• The contract must be supported by lawful consideration, defined as something of value (act, abstinence, or promise) given at the promisor’s desire. Consideration must not be illegal, immoral, or against public policy (Section 23).
• Explanation: Consideration is the “price” for the promise, e.g., payment for goods delivered. A contract to pay for illegal activities (e.g., smuggling) is void due to unlawful consideration.
• Source: Indian Contract Act 1872 Notes – jkshahclasses.com.

1. Lawful Object (Section 23):

• The object (purpose) of the contract must be lawful, meaning it should not be forbidden by law, fraudulent, immoral, or opposed to public policy.
• Explanation: A contract to defraud someone or engage in illegal trade has an unlawful object and is void. For example, an agreement to sell prohibited drugs is not valid.
• Source: The Indian Contract Act 1872: Agreements and Contracts – vedantu.com.

1. Not Expressly Declared Void:

• The agreement must not be expressly declared void under the Indian Contract Act or other laws. Sections 24-30 and 56 list void agreements, such as those in restraint of trade (Section 27, with exceptions) or wagering agreements (Section 30).
• Explanation: An agreement to restrain a person from working (except in specific cases like sale of goodwill) is void under Section 27. For example, a contract preventing B from practicing his profession is unenforceable.
• Source: Indian Contract Act 1872: A Comprehensive Guide – Unacademy.

1. Intention to Create Legal Relations:

• Though not explicitly mentioned in Section 10, courts infer that parties must intend to create legal obligations for the contract to be enforceable. Social or domestic agreements typically lack this intention.
• Explanation: In Balfour v. Balfour (1919), a husband’s promise to pay his wife maintenance was not a contract due to lack of legal intention. In contrast, commercial agreements presume such intention.
• Source: Law of Contracts Notes – lawbhoomi.com.

1. Certainty and Possibility of Performance:

• The terms of the contract must be certain and not vague (Section 29), and the agreement must be capable of performance. Agreements with uncertain terms or impossible objectives are void.
• Explanation: An agreement to sell “some goods” without specifying quantity or type is void for uncertainty. Similarly, a contract to deliver goods to the moon (if impossible) is void under Section 56.
• Source: Indian Contract Act 1872 Notes – jkshahclasses.com.

1. Legal Formalities (Where Applicable):

• While not explicitly stated in Section 10, certain contracts require specific formalities (e.g., writing, registration, or stamping) under other laws, such as the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, or the Indian Registration Act, 1908.
• Explanation: A contract for the sale of immovable property worth over Rs. 100 must be in writing and registered. Failure to comply may render the contract unenforceable.
• Source: The Indian Contract Act 1872: Agreements and Contracts – vedantu.com.

Conclusion

For an agreement to be a valid contract under Section 10, it must involve a lawful offer and acceptance, free consent, competent parties, lawful consideration and object, and must not be void. Additionally, judicial interpretations emphasize the need for legal intention, certainty, possibility of performance, and compliance with legal formalities where required. These essentials ensure that contracts are enforceable, reflecting mutual obligations and legal validity.

Question-Who is competent to contract per Section 11? Discuss categories not competent per Section 12.

Competency to Contract as per Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, defines who is competent to contract. It states:
“Every person is competent to contract who is of the age of majority according to the law to which he is subject, and who is of sound mind, and is not disqualified from contracting by any law to which he is subject.”

Persons Competent to Contract (Section 11)

Based on Section 11, a person is competent to contract if they meet the following criteria:

1. Age of Majority:

• The person must be of the age of majority as per the law applicable to them. In India, the Indian Majority Act, 1875, sets the age of majority at 18 years for most individuals.
• Exception: For minors under the supervision of a Court of Wards, the age of majority is 21 years.
• Example: A person aged 18 or above can enter into a contract to buy property, assuming they meet other criteria.

1. Sound Mind:

• The person must be of sound mind at the time of making the contract, as further detailed in Section 12.
• Example: An individual who understands the terms of a sale agreement and its implications can contract.

1. Not Disqualified by Law:

• The person must not be disqualified from contracting by any law applicable to them. This includes individuals barred due to legal status, such as insolvents under bankruptcy laws or certain public officials prohibited from specific contracts.
• Example: A person who is not an undischarged insolvent or barred by law (e.g., a convicted felon under specific statutes) is competent.

Key Implication

A person meeting all three conditions—majority age, sound mind, and no legal disqualification—is competent to enter into a legally binding contract. Competency ensures that the parties have the capacity to understand and fulfill contractual obligations.

---

Categories Not Competent to Contract as per Section 12

Section 12 elaborates on the requirement of a “sound mind” and defines what constitutes soundness of mind for contracting. It states:
“A person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract if, at the time when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his interests. A person who is usually of unsound mind, but occasionally of sound mind, may make a contract when he is of sound mind. A person who is usually of sound mind, but occasionally of unsound mind, may not make a contract when he is of unsound mind.”

Based on Section 12, the primary category not competent to contract is persons of unsound mind during periods of unsoundness. The section also implies other categories when read with Section 11, such as minors and legally disqualified persons. Below are the categories not competent to contract, with a focus on unsound mind as per Section 12:

1. Persons of Unsound Mind (Section 12):

• A person is deemed of unsound mind if, at the time of contracting, they are incapable of:
  • Understanding the contract’s terms and implications.
  • Forming a rational judgment about the contract’s effect on their interests.
• Categories of Unsound Mind:
  • Lunatics: Individuals with mental disorders (e.g., schizophrenia) are incompetent during periods of insanity. However, they can contract during lucid intervals when they are of sound mind.
  • Example: A person diagnosed with a mental illness can sign a lease agreement during a period when they are mentally stable and understand the contract.
  • Idiots: Persons with permanent mental incapacity (e.g., severe congenital mental disability) are consistently incompetent to contract.
  • Example: An individual with severe intellectual disability cannot enter a valid contract to purchase goods.
  • Drunkards: Persons under the influence of alcohol or drugs to the extent that they cannot understand the contract or form rational judgment are incompetent at that time.
  • Example: A person intoxicated to the point of not comprehending a loan agreement cannot validly contract while in that state.
  • Persons Under Delirium or Temporary Mental Incapacity: Individuals temporarily incapacitated due to illness, fever, or other causes affecting mental capacity are incompetent during such periods.
  • Example: A person delirious from a high fever cannot sign a valid contract until they recover mental clarity.
• Key Principle: Soundness of mind is assessed at the time of contracting. A person usually of unsound mind can contract during lucid intervals, while a usually sound-minded person cannot contract during temporary unsoundness.
• Judicial Reference: In Inder Singh v. Parmeshwardhari Singh (1957), the court held that a contract by a person of unsound mind is void if they lacked capacity to understand or judge the contract’s effects.

1. Minors (Section 11, Implied by Section 12 Context):

• Though not directly addressed in Section 12, Section 11 specifies that minors (persons below 18, or 21 under Court of Wards) are not competent to contract. This is reinforced by judicial interpretations, such as Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose (1903), where a minor’s contract was held void.
• Explanation: A minor lacks the legal capacity to understand or bear the consequences of a contract fully. Contracts by minors are void ab initio (from the beginning), except for necessities supplied to a minor under Section 68.
• Example: A 16-year-old’s agreement to buy a car is not enforceable, as they are incompetent to contract.

1. Persons Disqualified by Law (Section 11, Implied in Context):

• Section 11 includes persons disqualified by law, which Section 12 does not directly address but is relevant to competency. Such disqualifications include:
  • Undischarged Insolvents: Persons declared bankrupt under insolvency laws (e.g., Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016) are restricted from entering certain contracts until discharged.
  • Example: An insolvent cannot contract to borrow money without court approval.
  • Alien Enemies: During wartime, citizens of enemy nations cannot contract with Indian citizens.
  • Example: A citizen of a country at war with India cannot enter a trade contract.
  • Convicts: Persons under certain legal restrictions (e.g., during imprisonment) may be barred from contracting under specific laws.
  • Example: A convicted prisoner may be restricted from entering property contracts.
  • Other Statutory Disqualifications: Certain professionals or officials (e.g., judges, public servants) may be barred from specific contracts under laws like the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
• Explanation: Legal disqualifications vary by statute but render individuals incompetent for specific contracts to protect public interest or legal processes.

Key Points and Implications

• Section 11 establishes a positive framework for competency, requiring majority age, sound mind, and no legal disqualification.
• Section 12 focuses on mental capacity, emphasizing that unsoundness of mind at the time of contracting renders a person incompetent, with provisions for temporary or intermittent mental states.
• Effect of Incompetency:
• Contracts by minors or persons of unsound mind are generally void ab initio (except for necessities under Section 68 for minors).
• Contracts by disqualified persons are void or unenforceable to the extent of the disqualification.
• Burden of Proof: The party alleging unsoundness of mind must prove it, as courts presume sanity unless evidence shows otherwise (e.g., medical records, witness testimony).
• Practical Example: A 17-year-old (minor) or a person during a psychotic episode (unsound mind) cannot validly contract to sell property. However, the same person, if of sound mind during a lucid interval or after reaching 18, becomes competent.

Judicial Precedents

• Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose (1903): The Privy Council ruled that a minor’s contract is void, reinforcing that minors are incompetent under Section 11.
• Amina Bibi v. Saiyid Yusuf (1922): A contract by a person of unsound mind was held void, as they could not understand or judge the contract’s effects, aligning with Section 12.
• Chacko v. Mahadevan (2007): The court emphasized that temporary unsoundness (e.g., due to intoxication) at the time of contracting renders the contract void if proven.

Conclusion

Under Section 11, a person is competent to contract if they are of the age of majority (18, or 21 under Court of Wards), of sound mind, and not disqualified by law. Section 12 specifies that persons of unsound mind—such as lunatics (except during lucid intervals), idiots, drunkards, or those under delirium—are not competent at the time of unsoundness, as they cannot understand or rationally judge the contract’s effects. Additionally, minors and legally disqualified persons (e.g., insolvents, alien enemies) are incompetent, as implied by Section 11. These provisions ensure that only individuals with the capacity to understand and fulfill contractual obligations can create enforceable agreements, protecting parties and upholding legal integrity.

Question-Distinguish between express and implied promises as per Section 9.

Distinction Between Express and Implied Promises as per Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, deals with the nature of promises in the context of proposals (offers) and acceptances. It states:
“In so far as the proposal or acceptance of any promise is made in words, the promise is said to be express. In so far as such proposal or acceptance is made otherwise than in words, the promise is said to be implied.”

Definitions

• Express Promise: A promise is express when the proposal (offer) or acceptance is made in words, whether written or spoken.
• Example: A offers to sell a car to B for Rs. 5 lakh in a written contract, and B accepts by signing the agreement. Both the offer and acceptance are express promises.
• Implied Promise: A promise is implied when the proposal or acceptance is inferred from the conduct, actions, or circumstances of the parties, rather than being explicitly stated in words.
• Example: A boards a bus and takes a seat. By this action, A impliedly promises to pay the fare, and the bus company impliedly promises to transport A to the destination.

Distinction Between Express and Implied Promises

Aspect	Express Promise	Implied Promise
Definition	A promise made through spoken or written words.	A promise inferred from actions, conduct, or circumstances, without words.
Mode of Expression	Explicitly stated in words (e.g., verbal agreement, written contract).	Conveyed through behavior or situation (e.g., entering a taxi implies payment).
Clarity	Clear and unambiguous, as terms are directly communicated.	May require interpretation of actions or context to understand terms.
Examples	– A says, “I will sell you my laptop for Rs. 30,000,” and B replies, “I accept.” – A written lease agreement.	– A takes a haircut at a salon, implying a promise to pay for the service. – A bids at an auction by raising a hand, implying an offer.
Legal Effect	Binding as per terms explicitly agreed, subject to Sections 10 and 11.	Binding if actions clearly indicate intent to contract, subject to Sections 10 and 11.
Evidence	Proven through documents, verbal statements, or witnesses to the words used.	Proven through conduct, circumstances, or industry practices.
Common Contexts	Formal contracts (e.g., sale agreements, employment contracts).	Everyday transactions (e.g., public transport, restaurant services).
Section Reference	Section 9: “Made in words.”	Section 9: “Made otherwise than in words.”

Detailed Explanation

1. Express Promises:

• These arise when the parties explicitly articulate their intentions through spoken or written words, leaving little room for ambiguity.
• Judicial Example: In Balfour v. Balfour (1919) (though an English case, relevant for principles), a husband’s verbal promise to pay his wife maintenance was express but not enforceable due to lack of legal intention. In Indian law, express promises in commercial contexts (e.g., a written sale deed) are typically enforceable if they meet Section 10 requirements.
• Practical Context: Express promises are common in formal agreements, such as contracts for property sales, employment, or services, where terms are documented or verbally agreed upon.

1. Implied Promises:

• These are inferred from the parties’ conduct or the nature of the transaction, often in situations where verbal or written communication is absent but intent to contract is evident.
• Judicial Example: In Upton-on-Severn RDC v. Powell (1942) (an English case, illustrative for Indian law), a farmer’s request for fire brigade services implied a promise to pay, as the service was not free. In India, similar principles apply, such as a customer eating at a restaurant implying a promise to pay for the meal.
• Practical Context: Implied promises are prevalent in daily transactions, such as purchasing goods at a store, using public transport, or engaging in services where the expectation of payment or performance is understood without explicit agreement.

Key Points and Implications

• Formation of Contract: Both express and implied promises can form valid contracts under Section 10, provided they meet essentials like free consent, lawful consideration, and competent parties. The distinction lies in how the promise is communicated, not in its legal validity.
• Section 9’s Role: It clarifies that promises (whether part of an offer or acceptance) can be express or implied, ensuring flexibility in recognizing contracts in varied contexts, from written agreements to informal transactions.
• Proof Challenges: Express promises are easier to prove due to tangible evidence (e.g., contracts, emails). Implied promises may require evidence of conduct or industry norms, which can be more complex, as seen in cases like Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893), where an advertisement implied a unilateral contract.
• Cultural and Practical Relevance: In India, implied promises are significant in informal settings (e.g., hiring a rickshaw or buying street food), where contracts are formed without explicit words but are enforceable based on mutual understanding.

Conclusion

Under Section 9, express promises are those articulated in words (spoken or written), while implied promises are inferred from conduct or circumstances. Express promises offer clarity and are common in formal contracts, whereas implied promises facilitate everyday transactions by recognizing intent through actions. Both are equally valid for forming contracts, provided other requirements of the Act are met, ensuring that the law accommodates diverse contractual scenarios in commercial and informal contexts.