3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

TC –6P

3RD DE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION, 2019

BEFORE
DISTRICT COURT OF DELHI
UNDER SEC. 6 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

COMPANY Z................................................................................................PLAINTIFF
Versus
DEEP…………….........…………………………………….......................DEFENDANT

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS OF AUTHORITIES

2. STATEMENT OF FACTS
3. STAEMENT OF ISSUES
4. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
5. STATEMENT OF ISSUES
6. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
7. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

7.1 THAT THE SUIT IS MANITANABLE IN THE HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT

7.2 THAT THERE WAS A VALID CONTRACT AMONG THE PARTIES

7.3 THAT ON ACCOUNT OF BREACH OF CONTRACT, THE PLAINTIF IS

ENTITLED TO COMPENSATION

8. PRAYER

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

& And

AIR All India Reporter

Art. Article

C.P.C. Code of Civil Procedure

Com. Company

Def Defendant

ICA Indian Contract Act

Lah. Lahore

Ltd. Limited

Para Paragraph

Sec. Section

v. Versus

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

NAME Page no.

M.C. Nagalakshmi v. M.A. Farook
Surta Singh v. Pritam Singh
Yanalla Maheshwari & ors v. Ananthula Sayyama
Khan Gul v. Lakha Singh
Jagar Nath Singh v. Lalta Prasad
Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. V. State bank of India & ors
T.R. Appasami v. Narayanaswami
Hanumanta v. Sitharamayya
McDermott International Inc. V. Burn Standard Co. Ltd
Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Balbir Singh
Haryana Urban Development Authority v. Tilak Raj Ranga
Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Vidyawati
Haryana Development Authority v. Suman Bansal
Gauri Shankar Prasad v. Brahma Nandsingh
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ruchi Printers

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

STATUTES
S.NO NAME PAGE NO.
1. INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872
2. SPECIFIC RELEIF ACT, 1963
3. LIMITATION ACT,1963
4. CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE ,1908
5. INDIAN COMPANIES ACT, 2013
6. INDIAN MAJORITY ACT, 1875

BOOKS &REPORTS
S.NO TITLE PAGE NO.
1. Contract and Specific Relief, Avtar Singh, 12thedn.
2. The Indian Contract Act, Mulla, 8thedn.
3. Black’s Law Dictionary
4. Anson’s Law of Contracts, 29thEdn.
5. The Indian Contract Act, 1872 Bare Act
6. The Specific Relief Act, 1963 Bare Act
7. The Limitation Act, B.B. Mitra, 12thedn.
8. Companies Act, Avtar Singh, 3rdedn.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The counsel for plaintiff has endorsed their pleadings before the Honourable District Court of
Delhi under Sec. 6, Sec. 9 & Sec. 20 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in which the Hon’ble
Court has the jurisdiction.

Sec.6, C.P.C
Save in so far as is otherwise expressly provided, nothing herein contained shall operate to give
any Court jurisdiction over suits the amount or value of the subject-matter of which exceeds the
pecuniary limits (if any) of its ordinary jurisdiction.

Sec. 9, C.P.C
It states that, “the courts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of civil nature excepting suits of
which their cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred”

Sec. 20, C.P.C

"Other suits to be instituted where defendants reside, or cause of action arises"

Subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local limits
of whose jurisdiction

(a) the def., or each of the def. where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement
of the suit, actually & voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain; or
(b) any of the def., where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit,
actually & voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain, provided that
in such case either the leave of the Court is given, or the defendants who do not reside, or carry
on business, or personally work for gain, as aforesaid, acquiesce in such institution; or (c) The
cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

STATEMENT OF FACTS

BACKGROUND
Deep, a 17-year-old boy genius in the field of computers science comes across an advertisement,
which was an invitation to offer, regarding freelance app development. He offered for the same
through a phone call which was accepted & was asked to crack an interview with the Vice-
President of the company as a condition subsequent. The interview was held on 15/4/19 via
phone & the whole conversation with Deep was recorded as per the company policy. The
company also had a policy not to have a contract with minors.

EVENTS THAT OCCURED AFTER IT

The company sent a contract by post on 16/05/2019 for Deep’s signature which was duly signed
by him & posted back. Deep is informed that he must submit the prototype of the app by
31/8/2019 & also received an advance of Rs 50,000 for the same. On 23/7/2019 Deep turned
major. Realising that he would not be able to complete the prototype on the given date, he asked
for an extension by 2 weeks on 30/8/2019 & a further sum of Rs 10,000 from the company.

RESULT OF THE EVENTS

The plaintiff which had already spent a lot on promotional activities denied extension to the def.
& the sum of money & sued him for breach of contract on 14/09/2019.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

I. WHETHER THE SUIT BROUGHT BEFORE THIS HON’BLE COURT IS

MAINTAINABLE OR NOT.

II. IS THE CONTRACT VALID OR VOID.

III. WHETHER THE COMPANY IS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE

COMPENSATION.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

.
I. ISSUE 1 – THAT THE PRESENT SUIT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE
COURT IS MAINTAINABLE.
It is humbly submitted before this Hon’ble Court that the suit before it is maintainable
as the plaintiff has sufficient Locus Standi as according to The Commercial Courts,
Commercial Division & Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Act, 2015,
the suit lies within the original jurisdiction on the Commercial Division of the Delhi
District Court.

2. ISSUE 2 – WHETHER THE CONTRACT IS VALID OR VOID. -

2.1. The plaintiff contends in lieu of cited judgements that the contract was valid.
Moreover, the contract became voidable by virtue of section 55 of Indian Contract
Act,1872.
2.2. The plaintiff contends that there was a representation by the defendant as regards
To the question of competency to the contract which was a standard form of
Contract and thus the contract stands void as per section 65 of the Indian Contract
Act, 1872.

3. ISSUE 3 – WHETHER THE COMPANY IS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE

COMPENSATION.
It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble court that there was a breach of contract as
all the essentials of a valid contract was there but there was only partial performance
On the part of the defendant. Time was the essence of the contract but the it was not
performed on the due date. Also, the company invested in promotional activities,
leading them to believe that it will earn them good revenue if the prototype was made
available on time as well as affecting the company’s goodwill in the market. Hence it
is humbly pleaded in this court of law to allow the compensation to the plaintiff.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 1: THE SUIT IS MAINTAINABLE IN THIS HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT

1.1. Jurisdiction, Under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908:

Sec.6 of the code of civil procedure states that:
“Court may pass a decree in excess of its pecuniary jurisdiction”
Say in so far as is otherwise expressly provided, nothing herein contained shall
operate to give any Court jurisdiction over suits the amount or value of the subject-
matter of which exceeds the pecuniary limits (if any) of its ordinary jurisdiction1.
Sec. 9 of the code of civil procedure states that:
“the courts shall have jurisdiction to try all suits of civil nature excepting suits of which their
cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred”

Sec. 20 of the code of civil procedure states that: -

“Other suits to be instituted where defendants reside, or cause of action arises”

Subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local
limitations of whose jurisdictions: -
(a) the defendant, or each of the defendants where there are more than one, at the time of the
commencement of the suit, actually & voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally
works for gain; or

(b) any of the defendants, where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of
the suit, actually & voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain,
provided that in such case either the leave of the Court is given, or the defendants who do not
reside, or carry on business, or personally work for gain, as aforesaid, acquiesce in such

1Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

institution; or

(c) the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.

Explanation I.-Where a person has a permanent dwelling at one place & also a temporary
residence at another place, he shall be deemed to reside at both places in respect of any cause of
action arising at the place where he has such temporary residence.

Explanation II.-A corporation shall be deemed to carry on business at its sole or principal office
in {Subs. by Act 2 of 1951, s.3, for "the States". [India] or, in respect of any cause of action
arising at any place where it has also a subordinate office, at such place2.

1(2) Determination of Specified Value

Sec. 12 (1) (b) states that-
“Where the relief sought in a suit, appeal or application relates to movable property or to
a right therein, the market value of the movable property as on the date of filing of the
Suit, appeal or application, as the case may be, shall be taken into account for determining
Such Specified Value;”

Thus, for the maintainability of the suit, the Specified Value in relation to a commercial
Dispute must be less than three lakh Rs. & in a suit relating to a movable
Property, the Specified Value is taken to be the market value of the property as on the date
Of filing of the suit.

The suit was filed after the denied extension & the compensation claimed was Rs 2,00,000.
Therefore, the specified value of the suit being Rs 2,00,000.

The specified amount is less than Rs 3,00,000 the suit lies within

The pecuniary limits of specified value of the commercial division of district court

2 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

According to The Commercial Courts, Commercial Division & Commercial Appellate Division
of High Courts Act, 2015, the plaint is maintainable in this honble district court.

THE COMPANY CAN SUE AND BE SUED

According to section 9 of the companies act, 2013: -

“A company in law is a person. It is a distinct legal persona existing independent of its

members.”

This means that the company is vested with corporate personality which is distinct from the
members who compose him. Thus, the company acquires its separate legal entity.

LIMITATIONS ACT ,1963

According to section 23: -

“Suits for compensation for act not actionable without special damage-in the case of a suit for
compensation for an act which does not give rise to a cause of action unless some specific
injury actually results there from, the period of limitation shall be computed from the time
when the injury result”

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

II. IS THE CONTRACT VOID OR VALID?

2.1 THE CONTRACT IS VALID.

Deep had entered into the contract on 16/05/2019 by signing the contract. At the time of entering
into the contract, he was a minor. He became a major on 23/08/2019.3 On 30/08/2019 Deep
asked the company for an extension of 2 weeks & further Rs.10,000 to him in order to complete
the contract. It is here to be noted that, this request for extension & more money was an
expression of intention of deep to perform the contract, which was entered upon by him in
minority.

In the case of, MC Nagalakshmi v. M.A. Farook, the Karnataka High Court held that

“The defendant entered upon into the agreement of sale when she was a minor, through her
guardian. The bench decided on the question, “Whether the contract is enforceable against the
defendant when she has attained majority, since it was entered upon by her during her
minority?”. The court asserted that,

“The fact that the contract is not enforced before the minor has become, unless the minor that
she has repudiated the contract, she is bound by it.””4

If the minor enters into a contract & on attaining majority, does not cancel or repudiates the
contract then, that contract becomes binding on him.

In another case, Surta Singh v. Pritam Singh, the Punjab & Haryana High Court , while
deciding a matter on transfer of immovable property , quoted from Anson’s much celebrated
work on contract

3 The Indian Majority Act, 1875.

4MC Nagalakshmi vs M.A. Farook, AIR 2007 KNT 105.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

"Where an infant acquires an interest a permanent property to which obligations attach, or

enters into a contract involving continuous rights & duties, benefits & liabilities, & takes some

benefit under the contract, he will be bound, unless he expressly disclaims the contract during

infancy or within a reasonable time of attaining his majority."5

Here, the def. entered into a contract involving monetary benefits and acquired a sum of
Rs.50,000 after signing the contract & did not repudiate it or cancel the contract it on becoming a
major.

Hence, Def. is bound by the contract & is liable to develop the prototype of the app.

2.1.1 TIME IS THE ESSENTIAL

While entering into the contract, the plaintiff & Def. had agreed that the date of submission to
be 31/08/2019 & hence Def. had to submit the prototype by that date.

To have time as the essence, there should be, if the parties want to, the intention of both parties
to have time as essence & two important conditions:

a) Where delay operates as injury6.

Company suffered a loss as the prototype was not submitted on the stipulated date & this
delay had further added to the loss that company was incurring hence, delay had caused an
injury in the present case.

b) Where a party asks for extension of time for performance7.

Deep on realizing that it would not be possible for him to submit the app on the decided
date, asked for an extension 2 weeks & more money in order to perform the contract.

5Surta Singh vs Pritam Singh AIR 1983 P H 114.

6Avatar Singh, Contracts & Specific Relief, 377, 12th Ed, Eastern Book Company 2017.
7Avatar Singh, Contracts & Specific Relief, 377, 12th Ed, Eastern Book Company 2017.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

These two conditions are hence fulfilled & subsequently validated time being the essence of
the contract.

The plaintiff, in this regard, anticipating submission of the prototype, had started parallel
preparations & promotional activities. It is evident from the facts, that in order to have the
benefit from the company, Def. had to submit the app by 31/08/2019.

Hence, the contract, by lapse of time, becomes voidable at the option of the promisee i.e. the
plaintiff under the Sec. 55 of the ICA as,

“Effect of failure to perform at a fixed time, in contract in which time is essential.—When a

party to a contract promises to do a certain thing at or before a specified time, or certain
things at or before specified times, & fails to do any such thing at or before the specified
time, the contract, or so much of it as has not been performed, becomes voidable at the
option of the promisee, if the intention of the parties was that time should be of the essence
of the contract”8.

Furthermore, the contract stands cancelled under Sec. 27(a) of the SRA as

“Any person interested in contract may sue to have it rescinded, & such rescission may be
adjudged by the court, where the contract is voidable or terminable by the plaintiff””9.

And the plaintiff is justified in standing before the court to get the contract cancelled since it
is voidable at its option.

In the case of Yanalla Malleshwari & Ors. v. Ananthula Sayamma & Ors, the Andhra
High Court impressed upon the conditions necessary for Sec. 31 of the Specific Relief Act
as,

“It is a misconception that in every situation, a person who suffers injury by reason of a
document can file a suit for cancellation of such written statement. Two conditions must

8The Indian Contract Act, 1872.

9The Specific Relief Act, 1963.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

exist before one invokes Sec. 31 of SRA. -These are: the written instrument is void or
voidable against such person; & such person must have reasonable apprehension that such
instrument if left outstanding may cause him serious injury”10

This read with Sec. 55 of the ICA, 1872 endorses Sec. 31 of The SRA,1963.

2.2 Arguendo, The Contract is Void.

Def. on coming across an advertisement i.e., invitation to offer, proposed the freelance app
development to the company by offering himself through a phone call, which was accepted with
a condition subsequent. The condition was, that Deep must pass an interview with the Vice-
President of the company. On 15/04/2019, the interview was held between Deep and the Vice-
President, which was cracked by Deep and consequently, he won the contract. And the company
on 16/05/2019 posted the contract for Deep’s signature and which was duly received.

The company in the course of executing the contract follows two very important policies. These
are:

a) Recording the interview of the candidate with the Vice-President.

b) There should not be any contract done with a minor.

The motive of a company to have any policy is to safeguard itself and its interests from
any wrongful or legal damage. These policies should not be against any law of the land.
Therefore, these policies should comply with the law and be in conformity with law. The above
two policies are hence, justified by law.

The contract signed by Def. duly stated that the date of submission of the prototype would be
31/08/2019. Along with that, Rs.50,000 was given to him as part consideration.
Two notable facts here are

10 Yanalla Malleshwar&ors vs Ananthula Sayamma & orsAIR2007 AP 57

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

a) The contract was posted by the company to get the signature of Def. and,

b) The date stipulated for the submission of the app was 31/08/2109 and it was given by the
company only. symbolic of a standard form of contract. Since, the above deny the possibility of
any kind of negotiation on part of the defendant .

This contract hence, contains all the terms and conditions of the company.

It is therefore, reasonable to assume that the contract would have contained the question on the
age of the candidate, which forms the policy of the company viz. not to enter into a contract with
minor.

The minor, hence, inspite of the question had agreed to the contract and the company therefore
had no way to find this and was not aware of the fact that Deep, is incompetent to the contract
under Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act,1872.

The unawareness of the company is validated by fact that if the minority of Def. was known to
the company, it would have never furthered a substantial amount of Rs.50,000 to him since it
would risk maintainability of the contract and subsequently the reimbursement of the given
money would have been very difficult consequently, incurring a monetary damage to it.

The landmark judgment in the case of

1.Khan Gul v. Lakha Singh11- the defendant while still a minor , by fraudulently concealing his
age , contracted to sell a plot of land to the plaintiff he received consideration of Rs 17500 and
after that refused to performed his part of the contract. The plaintiff prayed for the recovery of
possession or refund of the money. the judgement was ruled in the favour of the plaintiff
according to section 41 of specific relief act [now 33(2)(a)]

2. Jagar Nath Singh V. Lalta Prasad12-I the judgement it was stated that where the person who
are infact underage induce others to buy property from them , they are liable in equity to make

11 ILR (1928)9 Lah 701.

12 ILR(1908-10)21 AIR 21.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

restitution to the purchaser for the benefit they have obtained before they can recover the
property.

Therefore , the contract stands void

ISSUE -3 WHETHER THE COMPANY IS ENTITLED TO RECEIVE

COMPENSATION

3.1 ENTITLED TO RECEIVE COMPENSATION WHEN THE CONTRACT IS

VOID

Deep, despite being a minor, entered into a contract with plaintiff. But according to Sec.
11 of the ICA, Deep was an incompetent party to the contract.

Sec. 11 of the ICA, 1872 clearly states that: -

“Every person is competent to contract who is of the age of majority according to the law to
which he is subject,1 & who is of sound mind & is not disqualified from contracting by any
law to which he is subject”

This tells us that the contract is void & never came into existence.

But even after this, the plaintiff is entitled to receive compensation from Deep as stated in

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

Thiru Arooran Sugars Ltd. vs State Bank of India &Ors13

Here in this case, it is held by the Madras High Court that: -

It was submitted that having derived the benefit, even though the transaction is void, they are
liable to reimburse the benefit derived by them under the said transaction.

13

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

Sec. 33(2)(b) of the SRA,1963 states that: -

“the agreement sought to be enforced against him in the suit is void by reason of his not
having been competent to contract under Sec. 11 of the ICA, 1872 (9 of 1872), the court may,
if the defendant has received any benefit under the agreement from the other party, require
him to restore, so far as may be, such benefit to that party, to the extent to which he or his
estate has benefited thereby."

Sec. 65 of the ICA, 1872 states that: -

"When an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void, any person
who has received any advantage under such agreement or contract is bound to restore it, or
to make compensation for it, to the person from whom he received it."

Deep received Rs 50,000 from plaintiff for the development of his prototype. According to
Sec. 33(2)(b) &Sec. 65 read together, he is required to restore the initial amount i.e. Rs
50,000 towards the plaint along with the compensation for the advertisement charges borne
by the very same party.

In T. R. Appasami v. Narayanaswami14, it was held by the bench that: -

"Where a minor fraudulently representing himself as major, induces an innocent person to

purchase property from him, & then sues for the recovery of that property on the ground
that, owing to his minority, the transaction was void ab initio, his case is covered by Sec. 65,
Contract Act. Hence under that Sec.& under Sec. 41, SRA, as well as under general
principles of equity, a decree entitling the minor to the recovery of that property cannot be
passed except on condition that he should refund the purchase money."

14

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

In another case, In Hanumantha v. Sitharamayya15 , the Madras High Court shows some light
on the purview of this Sec. of the SRA by holding that: -

"Sec. 41 cannot be understood as limited in its operation to void instruments only but is
applicable both to void & voidable instruments. The statutory discretion vested in the courts
of India by Sec. 41 is of wider amplitude than the corresponding rule of equity administered
in Engl& where there is no such statutory counterpart. That discretion is of course not to be
arbitrary but sound & reasonable & guided by well- settled judicial principles. But once it is
found that the requirements of the Sec. are satisfied & there exist circumstances which call
for the exercise of the discretion, the court is bound to afford relief without being hampered
by reference to the limitations which surround the corresponding rule of equity as,
administered elsewhere”

“Where a minor has executed deeds of sale during his minority without making any
misrepresentation as to his age & the purchasers had no knowledge that the executant was a
minor when the sales were made, a decree for setting aside the sale deeds can be made only
on condition that the minor refunds to the purchasers the amount of the consideration
received from them."

It is to be noted that Sec. 41 of the old SRA corresponds to Sec. 33 of the new SRA.

Thus, considering the facts & circumstances of the case, we are of the view that in view of
the provisions of Sec. 33 of the SRA read with Sec. 65 of the Contract Act, the defendant is
bound to restore the benefit derived by him under the suit transaction & in that view is liable
for the suit claim.

Restitution of benefits received under a void contract, do not involve the enforcement of the
contract but merely requires a court to restore the parties to the position obtaining, before the
execution of a contract.

15(1938) 48 LW 604 (MAD) (DB).

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

3.2 ENTITLED TO RECEIVE COMPENSATION WHEN THE CONTRACT IS

VALID
Def., having entered into the contract during minority, asks for an extension as well as for
Rs 10,000 to complete the contract thus signifies his intention to perform the contract. On
top of this, on attaining majority, does not cancel or repudiates the contract. Hence, the
contract becomes binding on him.

Moreover, we can claim that there has been a breach of contract on the part of the
defendant.

A cause of breach of contract claim has four elements:

1. The existence of a contract;

2. Performance by plaintiff
3. Failure to perform the contract by the defendant.
4. Resulting damages to the plaintiff.

Plaintiff, the plaintiff who gave an invitation to treat received an enquiry from the defendant
deep which subsequently led to the formation of a contract &Plaintiff fulfilled all the conditions
for a valid contract . there was a clear intention on the part of Deep to enter into a valid contract
& intended to be legally bound by his part of the bargain. Later he refused to submit the
prototype on the given date & instead asked for extension & an additional amount

Therefore, there was a breach of contract.

Damages for breach

A contract is a promise submitted by some compensation upon which either the remedy of
specific performance or that of specific relief is available . the damages claimed are
1. General damages – these are the damages which arise naturally in the natural course of
things from the breach itself . another mode of putting this is that the defendant is liable
for all that the defendant is liable for all that which naturally happens in the usual course
of things after the breach.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

2. Special damages – special damages are those which arise on account of the unusual
circumstances affecting the plaintiff they are recoverable if special circumstances are
brought to the knowledge of defendant so that the possibility of special loss was in the
contemplation of parties

Special circumstances already within the knowledge of contract breaker

If the special circumstances are already within the knowledge of the party breaking the contract,
the formality of communicating them to him may not be necessary was ruled in Simpson v .
London & north western railway Co .
Sec. 73 in the ICA, 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 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
1.In McDermott International Inc. V. Burn Standard Co. Ltd.16
It was stated that an invoice drawn only in a claim made in terms of the contract. For raising
a claim of breach of contract no invoice is to be drawn. A claim for overhead cost which
results in decrease in profit or management cost is a claim for damages
2. In Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Balbir Singh17
It was stated that the word compensation is a very wide connotation. It may constitute actual
loss and may expect to compensation for physical mental or even emotional suffering insult,
injury or even loss
The case was cited in the following cases
1. Haryana urban development authority v tilak raj ranga18
2. Ghaziabad development authority v vidyawati19
3. Haryana development authority v. sumanbansal20

16 (2006) 11 SCC 181.

17( 2004) 5 SCC 65.
18 (2005)5 SCC 573.
19 (2005) SCC 65.
20 (2005) 9 SCC 4.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

The plaintiff is entitled to general as well as special damages. The part consideration given to
the defendant by the plaintiff of Rs 50,000 is now a sunk cost for the company also the
promotion related activities was based mostly on the basis of the assumption that the
prototype would be ready on the given date & there is no way the company could have
thought an extension for 15 days would be asked one day before the submission date of the
prototype . the company not only lost the money invested in the app but also the amount
spent in promotional activities but also loss of a possible revenue that would have been
earned if the prototype would had been made available to the company on the given date .
thus calculating the amount Rs 2,00,000 is just a fair compensation for the plaintiff .
Time is the essence of contract there is no way the company could have anticipated any
possible delay one day before the date of completion & that too a delay of 15 days. Def.
clearly hid the fact of his inability to complete the prototype & if he had informed the
company further expenses in promotion & other app related activities would not have
occurred, not to mention the loss of goodwill of the firm in the market , it takes years for a
firm to build goodwill in the market place the failure of the defendant to complete the
prototype made the company look incompetent in front of the its customers and the
competitors can utilise the scenario to take over market share of the plaintiff & thus it should
be on the defendant to compensate the company for the damages occurred due to him hiding
the facts related to completion of the job assigned to him & also he was an adult at the time
when he hid the facts & he cannot plead negligence as law of l& says its assumed that every
adult has knowledge of the consequences of his activities & thus it is prayed that the plaintiff
receives compensation for the damages incurred by him due to the negligence of the
defendant .
The following cases can be referred where due to non performance of contract on time
compensation was awarded to the plaintiff
1. Gauri Shankar Prasad v. Brahma Nandsingh21
2. State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ruchi Printers22

21 (2008) 8 SCC 287.

22 (2016)12 SCC 628.

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

The contract becomes voidable on the part of the defendant & the plaint is entitled to receive
compensation for the damages suffered in accordance to Sec. 33(2)(b) of the SRA,1963 &Sec.55
&Sec. 65 of the ICA,1872.

Sec. 33(2)(a) states that: -

“the instrument sought to be enforced against him in the suit is voidable, the court may if the
defendant has received any benefit under the instrument from the other party, require him to
restore, so far as may be, such benefit to that party or to make compensation for it;”

Sec. 65 states that: -

“When an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void, any person who
has received any advantage under such agreement or contract is bound to restore, it, or to make
compensation for it, to the person from whom he received it.”

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF

 3RDDE NOVO INTRA MOOT COURT COMPETITION 2019

PRAYER

In light of the issues raised, arguments advanced & authorities cited, the counsel for the Plaintiff
humbly prays that the Hon’ble Court be pleased to adjudge by appropriate order or direction,
hold & declare:
1. that, the formation of a valid contract took place.
2. that, the defendant had breached the contract so formed. & that the defendant must be held
liable for the distress caused by them.
3. that, the plaintiff is entitled to damages. &that, the defendant must pay Rs 2,00,000 for
damages

MEMORIAL FOR PLAINTIFF