1.

Entores v Miles Far East Corp [1955] 2 QB 327

The complainants, Entores, were a company that was based in London. They had sent an
offer to purchase 100 tons of copper cathodes to the defendants, Miles Far East Corp. Their
company was based in Amsterdam and this offer was communicated by Telex, a form of
instantaneous communication. The Dutch company sent an acceptance of this offer by Telex
to the complainants. When the contract was not fulfilled, the complainants tried to sue the
defendants for damages.

2.Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v Girdharial Parshottamdas & Co

Plaintiff offered to get certain goods supplied at ahemdabad to defendants who accepted the
offer at khamgaon. On defendant’s failure to supply requisite goods, the plaintiff sued them at
ahemdabad. A dispute arose as to where was contract formed at khamgaon where acceptance
was given by defendants or at ahemdabad where acceptance was received by plaintiffs.

3. ABC Laminart Pvt. Ltd. v AP Agencies, Salem

4. Baroda Oil Cakes Traders v Parshottam Narayandas Bagulia
By his plaint the plaintiff had claimed to recover Rs. 10,800 from the defendants on the
ground that there was a valid contract between the parties and that the defendants had failed
to perform their part of the contract. In other words, it is an action for damages for breach of
contract. The defendants reside at Kanpur, outside the local limits of the jurisdiction of the
Civil Judge at Baroda, and the plaintiff conceded that the Civil Judge in whose Court he filed
the plaint would have no jurisdiction to entertain the suit under the provisions of Section 20,
Sub-sections (a) and (b), of the Code of Civil Procedure.

5. Nazir Ahmed v Jiwan Das

6. Anant Kumar v. Bhagwan Rai
7. Kundan Bibi v. Sree Narayan
Defendant, while he was a minor received some goods from the plaintiff in connection with
his business and was indebted to him, when he attained majority, he took some more money
and executed a bond for paying the total amount to the plaintiff. In an action by the plaintiff
to recover the said amount, it was contended by the defendant that he was not liable to pay as
they purported to be in his minority. However, the defendant was made liable to pay the
whole amount since there was a new consideration attached.

8. Colles Cranes Of India Ltd v Speedeo Spares Cor

the plaintiff company placed an order, with the defendant for the sale to the plaintiff of
iron joists and other articles.The defendant agreed to sell and deliver these goods
according to the terms and conditions of that purchase order. It was also a term and
condition of the agreement that the defendant should deliver the said goods within 10
days of the date of the agreement. It was pleaded that time was of the essence of the
contract. the plaintiff paid in advance to the defendant towards the price of the said
goods. The plaintiff further states in the plaint that the defendant failed to deliver the
goods according to the contract and within the time stipulated thereunder. It is,
therefore, alleged that the defendant committed breach of the contract. The further
pleading of the plaintiff is that it extended the time for delivery of the goods to enable
the defendant to fulfil their obligations under the contract and the last date extended
for the delivery of such goods was up to August 21. 1964. With regard to the delivery
and supply of these goods, the position is that the defendant from time to time
delivered diverse quantities of Roods under the contract not only up to the extended
time of 21-8-1964 but also up to 27-11-1964. There is a balance of 9.037 M. Tonnes of
400 x 100 m.m. joists still outstanding under the said contract The whole case of the
plaintiff now is based on the fact that the defendant failed to deliver the said balance
quantity of goods or any part thereof under the contract. By a letter dated 30-12-1964,
the plaintiff terminated the contract. The plaintiff com-panv now claims a refund for the
sum of Rs. 12.362.73 P. being the balance on the aforesaid advance payment of Rs.
40,188.46 P. after deducting Rs. 27,325. 73 P. being the price of the goods delivered by
the defendant and accepted by the plaintiff. The plaintiff also by a letter dated 10-9-
1965 gave notice to the defendant that unless payment of Rs. 12,862.73 P. was made by
the defendant, the plaintiff would charge interest on the said sum at the rate of 6% per
annum.

9. Hitkari Motors v Attar singh

10.Simpson v London and north western railway co.

S a manufacturer, was in the habit of sending specimens of his goods for
exhibition to agricultural shows. After exhibiting a show at Belford, he entrusted
some of his samples to an agent of D company for carriage to another show at
Newcastle. On the consignment he wrote: “Must be at Newcastle Monday
certain” Owing to a default on the part of the company, the samples arrived late
for the show S therefore claimed damages for the loss of profits at the show. Held
that the company was liable as the agent had the knowledge of the special
circumstances.
11. Narain Singh v Chiranji Lal
12. Angila television Ltd. v Reed
Anglia asked Robert Reed to star in their TV film, The Man in the Wood. Reed withdrew just
before filming was about to start. Anglia did not claim for loss of profits, because that was
too uncertain. Instead they claimed wasted expenditure. Reed argued that damages could not
be claimed when incurred before a contract, that was wasted, thrown away. Lord Denning
MR held that expenditure incurred before could be claimed, so long as it was within the
contemplation of the parties.

13. Chaplin v Hicks

Seymour Hicks, a well-known actor and theatrical manager, invited ladies to submit their
photographs to compete in a beauty contest where the winners would be chosen by the
readers of one newspaper. He promised to give engagements as actresses to the winners. Ms
Chaplin submitted her photograph and came first in her section, which entitled her to be
considered for one of the twelve finalists. The notice reached her too late, and she was not
able to make the appointment with Mr Hicks. She sued Mr Hicks for damages for breach of
contract to compensate her for the loss of a chance to be selected for an engagement.