R

INTERNAL MOOT COURT, 2021

CENTRE FOR LEGAL STUDIES GIBS

ON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT OF DWARKA

U/S 9 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908

IN THE MATTER OF

HARSH……………………………………………………. APPELLANT

V.

ISHA………………………………………………………. RESPONDENT

SUBMISSION BEFORE THE HON’BLE JUSTICE AND

HIS COMPANION JUSTICES
OF THE HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT OF DWARKA

MEMORIAL FOR RESPONDENT

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. LIST OF

ABBREVIATION____________________________________3

2. INDEX OF

AUTHORITIES____________________________________4

3. STATEMENT OF

FACTS_____________________________________5

4. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION______________________________6

5. STATEMENT OF ISSUES_____________________________________7

6. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS_________________________________8

7. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED___________________________________9

I. Whether there was a contract between The Respondent & The

Petitioner under Indian Contract Act.1872?
II. Whether there was a breach of Contract by The
Respondent?
8. PRAYER___________________________________________________11

LIST OF ABBREVIATION

V. Versus

2
 Adv. Advertisement

BOC. Breach of Contract

& And

S. Section

Hon’ble Honourable

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

3
STATUTES REFERRED

1. INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872

2. CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

BOOKS, JOURNALS & ONLINE SOURCES:

1. R.K. Bangia: Indian Contract Act

2. Indian kanoon, http://indiankanoon.com

3. Black Law’s Medical Dictionary 4th edition

STATEMENT OF FACTS

4
1. Isha has just bought a New Groceries retail shop &, anxious to please the locals, decides to
put an adv. in the local paper stating that she will sell boxes of luxury Belgian chocolate
GODIVA at a discount price of Rs. 2500 instead of the recommended retail price of
Rs.5000.
2. It also states that there are only 50 boxes available. Isha has recently bought a laptop from
her son, Rohan to help with the running of the shop. The adv. states that anyone wanting
the chocolate should contact Isha in person at the shop or email her at isha@newshop.in.
The adv. appears in the local paper on Saturday.
3. Harsh sees the adv. at 4:30 P.M. on Saturday afternoon & immediately sends an e-mail to
Isha ordering 6 boxes of the Godiva Chocolate. The email is received on Isha’s laptop at
5:09 p.m. on Saturday.
4. On Saturday evening Isha realizes that the discount was too generous as she is making no
money on the chocolate & people are not coming to the shop & buying lots of other
groceries as she has hoped. She phones the local paper asking them to put the notice in the
next day informing people that the discount price is no longer available.
5. The Sunday paper is published at 9:00 a.m. on Sunday morning & it is delivered to Harsh
at 10:30 a.m. Isha opens for business at 10on Sunday. She reads Harsh’s email at 10:35 am
but refuses to sell him the chocolate. She replies stating that the discount is no longer
available. Harsh sued Isha for BOC.

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

5
The Respondent is appearing before this Hon’ble District Court, Dwarka on suo moto motion
this Hon’ble court. The power is inherent u/s 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 which is read
as under-

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 an office is contested is a suit of a civil
nature, notwithst&ing that such right may depend entirely on the decision of questions as to
religious rites or ceremonies.

[Explanation II] For the purposes of this S., 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 ISSUES

6
ISSUE 1

Whether there was a contract between Isha & Harsh under the Indian Contract Act.1872?

ISSUE 2

Whether there was a BOC. by Isha?

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. Whether there was a contract between Isha & Harsh under the Indian Contract Act.1872?
No, there is no contract between the plaintiff, Harsh, & the defendant, Isha as the
contract doesn’t complete the requirements to form a valid contract. Generally, adv.,

7
 catalogs, brochures, & announcements to the public related to the sale of merch&ise at a
specified price are not considered offers to enter into a binding contract. Rather, they are
considered invitations to make a deal. As such, it will usually not be a BOC. when the
advertiser refuses to sell an item at a price, he/she advertised.
2. Whether there was a BOC. by Isha?
The Respondent humbly submits that, owing to the facts & circumstances of the said
case read with the following contentions, it is evident that the Respondent cannot be
made liable for the BOC. as Isha, the Respondent had phoned the local paper asking
them to put a notice in the next day i.e. on Sunday informing people that the discount
price is no longer available.

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 1

Whether there was a contract between Isha & Harsh under the Indian Contract Act.1872?

8
To see whether the contract was a valid one, we must see that it fulfills the essentials of a
contract. Mostly, adv. to the public related to the sale of merch&ise at a specified price is not
considered offers to enter into a binding contract. Rather, they are considered invitations to
make a deal.

An adv. may be considered a valid offer if it has the following three elements:

1. It is sufficiently definite in its terms (e.g. descriptions, quality, quantity, & price)
2. It is communicated to a specific person or persons (a usually limited group of people)
3. The circumstances surrounding the publication show that the advertiser has the intent
to enter into a contract.

As we can see that, the first point to consider an adv. as a valid offer was fulfilled by the
Respondent, Isha but the second point was not as she did not communicate the offer to a
specific person or persons rather decides to put an adv. in the local paper stating that she
will sell boxes of luxury Belgian chocolate GODIVA at a discount price of Rs.

The intention to create legal relations was not by both parties. It was widely held by
LORD ATKIN LJ that business matters are created to contract. The adv. was an
initiation to offer to sell boxes of luxury Belgian chocolate GODIVA at a discount price
of Rs. 2500 instead of the recommended retail price of Rs.5000 but the offer was not
accepted by the Respondent & the Appellant didn’t get any e-mail in return to his order
of 6 boxes of chocolates itself justified that the contract was not formed under S. 37 of the
Indian Contract Act, 1872.

ISSUE 2

Whether there was a BOC. by Isha?

It is evident that the Respondent cannot be made liable for the BOC. as Isha, the
Respondent had phoned the local paper on Saturday asking them to put a notice in the
next day i.e. on Sunday informing people that the discount price is no longer available.
On Sunday the paper is published at 9:00 a.m. & it is delivered to the Appellant at
10:30 a.m. but he didn’t read the new offer made by the Respondent, Isha. An offer is
revocable unless the advertiser has already received a benefit or unless the other party
has already acted in reliance upon the offer (which in this case did not happen). For
example, an adv. that promises medical treatment for cancer patients will be revocable
unless the advertiser has already received payment from the patient here the appellant,

9
 Harsh did not make any payments so the respondent (refuses to sell him the chocolate
& she replies by stating that the discount is no longer available) Alternatively, the offer
cannot be revoked if the patient has moved in from across the country to take
advantage of the offer ( which also, in this case, did not happen)
This case is also in congruence with the previous argument of the presented case. Thus,
it is confirmed that the contract is not a valid one.
This tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear this claim because Respondent did not
agree to arbitration in the e-mail sent by the Appellant.

PRAYER

In the light of the facts, stated, issues raised & arguments advanced, it is therefore humbly
prayed that the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass a judgment & a decree against the
appellant & in favour of the respondent & graciously adjudge & declare:

10
 I. The Respondent is not liable for the damages asserted by the Appellant because
the claimed damages are not certain, & are also overcharged
II. & awarding the respondent the cost of the suit.

The Hon’ble court may be pleased to pass such further or any other order as the Hon’ble Court
may deem fit & proper in the light of justice, equity, & good conscience.

All of which is most humbly & respectfully submitted

P
11
 INTERNAL MOOT COURT, 2021

CENTRE FOR LEGAL STUDIES GIBS

ON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT OF DWARKA

U/S 9 OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE, 1908

IN THE MATTER OF

HARSH…………………………………………………………. APPELLANT

V.

ISHA….……………………….………………………….……. RESPONDENT

SUBMISSION BEFORE THE HON’BLE JUSTICE AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES

OF THE HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT OF DWARKA

MEMORIAL FOR APPELLANT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. TABLE OF CASES__________________________________________

2. LIST OF ABBREVIATION____________________________________

3. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES____________________________________

12
4. STATEMENT OF FACTS_____________________________________

5. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION______________________________

6. STATEMENT OF ISSUES_____________________________________

7. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS_________________________________

8. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED____________________________________

I. Whether there was a contract between The Respondent and The Petitioner under
Indian Contract Act.1872?

II. Whether there was a BOC. by The Respondent?

9. PRAYER__________________________________________________

TABLE OF CASES

1. Har Bhajan Lal v. Har Charan Lal

2. Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893)

13
 LIST OF ABBREVIATION

AIR All India Report

V. Versus

Adv. Advertisement

BOC. Breach of Contract

14
Acc. According

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

STATUTES REFERRED

1. INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872

2. CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908

15
BOOKS, JOURNALS AND ONLINE SOURCES:

1. R.K. BANGIA: INDIAN CONTRACT ACT

2. Indian kanoon, http://indiankanoon.com

3. Black Law’s Medical Dictionary 4th edition

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Isha has just bought a New Groceries retail shop and, anxious to please the locals,
decides to put an adv. in the local paper stating that she will sell boxes of luxury Belgian
chocolate GODIVA at a discount price of Rs. 2500 Instead of the recommended retail price of
Rs.5000.

16
2. It also states that there are only 50 boxes available. Isha has recently bought a laptop
from her son, Rohan to help with the running of the shop. The adv. states that anyone wanting
the chocolate should contact Isha in person at the shop or email her at isha@newshop.in. The
adv. appears in the local paper on Saturday.

3. Harsh sees the adv. at 4:30 P.M. on the Saturday afternoon and immediately sends an e-
mail to Isha ordering 6 boxes of the Godiva Chocolate. The email is received on Isha’s laptop at
5:09 p.m. on Saturday.

4. On Saturday evening Isha realizes that the discount was too generous as she is making
no money on the chocolate and people are not coming to the shop and buying lots of other
groceries as she has hoped. She phones the local paper asking them to put notice in the next day
informing people that the discount price is no longer available.

5. The Sunday paper is published at 9:00 a.m. on Sunday morning and it is delivered to
Harsh at 10:30 a.m. Isha opens for business at 10:00 a.m. on Sunday. She reads Harsh’s email
at 10:35 am but refuses to sell him the chocolate. She replies stating that the discount is no
longer available. Harsh sued Isha BOC.

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Respondent is appearing before this Hon’ble District Court, Dwarka on suo moto motion
this Hon’ble court. The power is inherent u/s 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 which is read
as under-

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.

17
[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 II] 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 ISSUES

ISSUE 1

Whether there was a contract between Isha and Harsh under Indian Contract Act.1872?

ISSUE 2

Whether there was a BOC. by Isha?

18
 SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. Whether there was a contract between Isha and Harsh under Indian Contract
Act.1872?

Yes, a valid contract exists between the plaintiff, Harsh and the defendant, Isha. The contract
completes all the essentials required to form a valid contract. It had an offer, which was general
in nature and was accepted by Harsh by conduct. In the case of general offers, there is no need
for communication of acceptance, anyone who performs the conditions of the contract is said to
have communicated his/her acceptance. This offer and acceptance were backed by a lawful

19
consideration, as the appellant had sent an email to the respondent after 4:30 p.m which was
also received by the respondent at 5:09 p.m.

2. Whether there was a BOC. by Isha?

Acc. to the general offer released by the defendant Isha, she was supposed to sell boxes of
luxury Belgian chocolate GODIVA at a discount price of Rs. 2500 Instead of the recommended
retail price of Rs.5000. Acc. to the adv. that Plaintiff Harsh saw at 4:30 p.m. on Saturday, he
ordered 6 boxes of chocolate. However, when the Plaintiff ask for his delivery, the respondent
refused to give at the given price. This is a clear case of a BOC. under Section 37 of the Indian
Contract Act, 1872.

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 1

Whether there was a contract between Isha and Harsh under Indian Contract Act.1872?

In order to see whether the contract was a valid one, we must see that it fulfils the essentials of
a contract. OFFER AND ACCEPTANCE: The general offer is the adv. put up by the Isha to
the world at large. The acceptance was given by Harsh after seeing the adv. by Isha at 4:30 p.m.
on Saturday afternoon as all the specification about the offer was laid down in the
advertisement. The sent e-mail by the Appellant at the e-mail address given the in the adv.was
itself the fulfilment of the contract.

20
INTENTION TO CREATE LEGAL RELATIONS: The intention to create legal relations was
by both the parties. It was widely held by LORD ATKIN LJ that business matters are created
with an intention to contract. The adv. was in no way merely a puff. The offer to sell boxes of
luxury Belgian chocolate GODIVA at a discount price of Rs. 2500 instead of the recommended
retail price of Rs.5000 was in itself justified in defining whether there were intention to create
legal relations.

LAWFUL CONSIDERATION: The plaintiff acted upon the adv. published by the defendant
and sent an e-mail on Saturday afternoon at 4:30 p.m. Here, the act of receiving the e-mail
becomes consideration for the defendant and the act of sending the e-mail becomes
consideration for the plaintiff.

CAPACITY OF PARTIES: Both the parties in this particular are well within the capacity to
contract. Both parties contracted with a sound mind and are above minority. It is thus, within
the capacity of parties

ISSUE 2

Whether there was a BOC. by Isha?

The modern position is that an offer can be made to the world at large. But the contract is not
made with all the world. Contract is made only with that person who comes forward and
performs the conditions of the proposal. The principle is thus stated in

“An offer need not be made to an ascertained person, but the offer can be accepted by an
ascertain person. An offer of this kind was already made in Har Bhajan Lal v. Har Charan
Lal .

Acc. to the adv. displayed by the defendant, Isha, she had promised that she will sell boxes of
luxury Belgian chocolate GODIVA at a discount price of Rs. 2500/- instead of the
recommended retail price of Rs.5000/- she also stated that anyone wanting the chocolate should
contact her in person at the shop or email her at isha@newshop.in. BOWEN LJ had brilliantly
expatiated in Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. case that an offer made to the world at large,
becomes liable to anyone who, before it is retracted, performs the conditions, and although the
offer is made to the world, the contract is made with the limited portion of the public who come
forward and perform the condition on the faith of the adv..

Isha V. Harsh case is much like the above-mentioned case. There was an adv. in both the cases
regarding the use of the given product. The principle of acceptance by performing conditions

21
and receiving consideration was followed by YEARS CJ of the Allahabad High Court in Har
Bhajan Lal v. Har Charan Lal and applied to a situation whether terms of a general offer were
substantially, though not literally compiled with.

In the above-mentioned case, the offer was made to the general public and was accepted by the
plaintiff through an act of performance. It was thus held by the esteemed Judge that the
plaintiff was entitled to the amount offered.

This case is also in congruence with the previous argument of the presented case. Thus, when it
is confirmed of the contract that it is a valid one, we can see to it that consideration, act of
receiving the e-mail becomes BOC.. The plaintiff is entitled to receive the boxes of chocolate at
the discount price of Rs. 2500/- instead of the recommended retail price of Rs.5000/-.

PRAYER

In the light of the facts, stated, issues raised and arguments advanced, it is therefore humbly
prayed that the honourable court may be pleaded to pass a judgement and a decree against the
defendant and in favour of the plaintiff and graciously adjudge and declare:

I. That the defendant should sell boxes of luxury Belgian chocolate GODIVA at a discount
price of Rs. 2500/- instead of the recommended retail price of Rs.5000/- to the plaintiff as
damages for the BOC.

II. And awarding the plaintiff the cost of the suit.

The honourable court may be pleased to pass such further or any other order as the
honourable court may deem fit and proper in the light of justice, equity and good conscience.

22
All of which is most humbly and respectfully submitted

23
24