POWELL Vs.

LEE

SWAMI VIVEKANAND SUBHARTI UNIVERSITY,

MEERUT, U.P.

SUBJECT: GENERAL PRINCIPLES AND

THEORIES OF CONTRACT
POWELL
VS
LEE

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

ADITYA PUNDIR
(B.A L.L.B)
1ST SEMESTER

SARDAR PATEL INSTITUTE OF LAW

MEERUT
(2022-2023)
 ()
TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents..………………………………………………………………I
Acknowledgement………………………………………………………………II
List of Abbreviations...………………………………………………………...III
Index of Authorities…..………………………………………………………..IV
a. Cases Cited…...……………………………………………………………...iv
b. Books and Treatises ………….…………………………………………...iv
c. Dictionaries and Law Lexicons…..…………………………………………iv
d. Legal Databases…………………………………………………………….iv
e. Legislations...……………………………………………………………….iv
Statement of Jurisdiction ………………………………………………………V
Facts of the case………………….……………………………………………VI
Background of the Case………………………………………………………VII
Issues Raised…………………………………………………………………VIII
Summary of Arguments…………………….………………………………….IX
Arguments Advanced ………………………………………………………X
Issue 1 …………………………………………………………………….x
Issue 2 …………………………………………………………………….x
Prayer…... …………………………………………………………………….xi

i
 ()
TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
At the very outset, I would like to pay thanks to the almighty God. It gives me immense
pleasure to acknowledge and to say thanks to the ones who helped me throughout the course
of my work. I am really thankful to our respected subject teacher under whose learned and
scholarly guidance the present work has been completed. She helped us in a passive way. She
gave me moral support and guided me in different matters regarding the topic. She had been
very kind and patient while suggesting me the outlines of this Memorial and correcting my
doubts.
I express my sincere gratitude’s to) granting permission of proper under the above-mentioned
supervision.

I want to pay my sincere thanks to Dean Faculty of Law, all the teachers of SARDAR

PATEL SUBHARTI INSTITUTE OF LAW, SWAMI VIVEKANANDA SUBHARTI

UNIVERSITY. I want to thank all my friends who helped me in completing my work. Last,
but not the least, my thanks to all who have helped directly or indirectly in the completion of
my work.

ADITYA PUNDIR

B.A. LL.B.

1ST Semester

ii
 ()
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

& And

ie That is

Hon’ble Honourable

Sec. Section

iii
 ()
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

A. LIST OF STATUES:

1. THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT,1872

B. BOOKS AND TREATISES
1. FR,DR,DAVIS PANADAN VARGHERE CMI, LAW OF CONTRACT
2. R.K BANGIYA, LAW OF CONTRACT 2020
C. DICTIONARIES AND LAW LEXICONS
1. LAWVLEXIX.IN
2. KJ AIYAR, JUDICIAL DICTIONARY (13TH EDITION 2001)
D. LEGAL DATABASES
A. Manupatra
B. WWW.SCCONLINE.COM
C. WWW.BLOGIPLEADERS.COM
D. WWW.Westlaw.COM
E. Lexis Nexis

iv
 SSTATEMENT
TATEMENT O
OFF JJURISDICTION
URISDICTION

The hon’ble court has the jurisdiction to hear the matter as the matter comes under the
territorial jurisdiction of the Hon’ble court.
The county court judge held that there was no contract as there had been no
authorised communication of intention to contract on the part of the body, that
is, the managers, alleged to be a party to the contract. This decision was upheld
by the King's Bench Division .

A contract comes into effect from the acceptance of an offer. When the
individual towards whom the offer is made gives his assent thereto, the proposal
is said to be accepted, (section 2(b) of the indian contract act, 1872). Therefore,
acceptance of the offer should be absolute and unqualified. It cannot be
conditional.

v
 FACTS OF THE CASE

 Here Mr. Powell is referred to as the plaintiff. He was actually one of the
candidates appear to be in the position of headmaster of a school. The
manager at that time referred his candidature to the appointing authority,
and the appointing authority, in return, release a resolution which sort of
appointing him to the said position. At this point, there was no formal
acceptance directly to him, and these were only internal dealings at that
time.
 One board member heard the discussion from a distance in which the
other board members were discussing that they would finally appoint him
as the headmaster of the school. He then proceeded to inform Powell of
the same. After getting the intimation, Powell was quite happy that he
was being appointed as the headmaster, but later on, the members of the
board cancelled his resolution of being appointed as the headmaster, and
because of this decision, Powell went on to file a suit for breach of
contract against the managers.
 Mr. Powell [hereinafter referred to as the “plaintiff”] applied an
application to the school for the position of headmaster. The School
Board accepted his application and thereby decided to appoint him.
 However, before such decision of appointment was conveyed to him by
the authorized authority, one of the members of the board acting in his
individual capacity informed the plaintiff of the board’s decision. Later,
due to some reason, the board changed their mind and decided to
withdraw their decision by appointing someone else.
 Aggrieved by this, the plaintiff on the grounds of breach of contract filed
a suit against the school.

vi
 BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

 The plaintiff applied for the job for the position of a headmaster at a
school. There was a committee that made the decisions for hiring. The
committee in its meeting, decided to appoint the plaintiff and the manager
of the school, considering the selection, put forth a resolution to the
committee to hire the defendant. 
 A member of the same committee informed the plaintiff about the
selection from the committee and the resolution that was put forth by the
manager. This was just verbal communication, and it is important to note
that there was no formal communication from the school to the plaintiff. 
 The management of the school later and cancelled the resolution for
hiring the plaintiff.  The plaintiff did not get the job which he was
supposed to get as per the member of the committee.
 Aggrieved by the decision and confused by the state of affairs, the
plaintiff filed a suit in the Court. 

vii
 ISSUES RAISED

ISSUE 1. Whether, the school was liable for breach of contract.

ISSUE 2. The main contention that came to the court was whether there was an
actual breach of contract or not as stated by the plaintiff?

viii
 ()
ISSUE

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

Issue 1
A. WHETHER, THE SCHOOL WAS LIABLE FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT.
Laws Involved
 Section 2(a) of the Indian Contract Act, 18721
 Section 2(b) of the Indian Contract Act, 18722
 According to the Kings Bench Division, the question which needs to be considered is
whether a person acting in his unauthorized capacity communicates the acceptance of
an offer. The Hon’ble Judge of the country court stated, for an acceptance to be valid
it is necessary that it is communicated. Moreover, the acceptance of such
communication should be carried out by the offeree himself in his authorized capacity
or by someone appointed by him.
 In the above case, it was observed that the said member of the board was not in the
capacity to accept the offer nor was he appointed by the board to communicate the
acceptance. So, the question of breach of contract never arises as the acceptance was
never communicated by the school board acting in their authorized capacity.

Issue 2
B. THE MAIN CONTENTION THAT CAME TO THE COURT WAS
WHETHER THERE WAS AN ACTUAL BREACH OF CONTRACT OR NOT
AS STATED BY THE PLAINTIFF?
 The plaintiff was informed about the alleged selection that was under discussion when
the resolution was submitted.  The information was furnished to him by a member of
the committee, and not someone representing the committee. The person of the
committee had no authority to do so, nor did he have the consent to inform the
plaintiff about something that was not even confirmed yet.

ADVANCED ARGUMENTS
1
Section 2(a) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872: 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
2
Section 2(b) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872: "When the person to whom the proposal is made, signifies his
assent thereto, the offer is said to be accepted. A proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise."

ix
 ()
ISSUE

ISSUE 1. WHETHER, THE SCHOOL WAS LIABLE FOR BREACH OF

CONTRACT
“Acceptance subject to the contract is no acceptance.”
 The main thing to note here is that the acceptance was never formally conveyed to
Mr. Powell. So technically, he shouldn’t be engaging in a suit of breach of contract
as- to the law; he was never conveyed anything. And when he was conveyed the final
decision by the members of the board, it was a rejection. This decision was the only
and final decision as it was conveyed to him by a formally authorised person in
charge of doing the same. If we take this case in context to the Indian contract act, we
will see that the opening to the post of headmaster was only an invitation to offer and
when Mr. Powell applied for the same, he basically intimated his offer to be in place
of the headmaster. And now it was up to the board of members to either accept the
offer and convey their acceptance to him or reject the offer, which they actually did.
So there is nothing wrong, legally, with this whole situation, and the judgement of the
court is, in fact, in the interest of all the parties involved.
 The plaintiff was informed about the alleged selection that was under discussion when
the resolution was submitted.  The information was furnished to him by a member of
the committee, and not someone representing the committee. The person of the
committee had no authority to do so, nor did he have the consent to inform the
plaintiff about something that was not even confirmed yet.
 There was a resolution that was put forth to the Board. However, there was no form of
official confirmation provided to the plaintiff which spoke about his selection as the
headmaster of the school. The only form of official information the plaintiff received
was from the management that said that the plaintiff was not selected for the position
he applied for. 
 Since there was no contract, only an offer put forward by the plaintiff, there was no
breach of the said contract. The status of the contract stood at the offer of the job
being rejected by the school. 
ISSUE 2. THE MAIN CONTENTION THAT CAME TO THE COURT WAS
WHETHER THERE WAS AN ACTUAL BREACH OF CONTRACT OR NOT AS
STATED BY THE PLAINTIFF?

x
 ()
ISSUE

 Any document which is provided by one party to another is at least signed or stamped
or given in the official letter head of the party’s company.
 A contract has an essential of being delivered by a competent authority. The person
from the committee who informed the plaintiff was not a competent authority.
Though the person was in the committee of the school that made all the major
decisions, the same person was not authorised to communicate something to outside
parties without the consent of the people who he might be representing. 
 The concept of due diligence talks about the same as well. If the plaintiff had applied
due diligence, he would know that the official notification or letter of appointment or
a call would have come from the school itself. There was an incorrect representation
by the person from the committee, but it is the duty of the plaintiff to cross check the
details to jump to a conclusion that would be beneficial and would have a strong legal
backbone. 
 This case, simply put, is the right example of competency of a person to speak on
behalf of the organisation regarding the contract, the essentials of a contract, the
breach of a contract and the rejection of an offer. 

xi
 PRAYER

PRAYER

Wherefore, in the light of the facts of the case, issues raised, arguments advanced and
authorities cited, this Hon’ble court may be pleased to:
1. That in this case, the defendant should held liable for the breach of contract.
2. And, plaintiff is entitled to damages because of lost profits.

AND/OR

Pass any other order that it deems fit in the interest of Justice, Equity and Good Conscience.
And for this, the { Counsel for the DEFENDANT)} shall as in duty bound, forever humbly
pray.

SD/
………………….
Respectfully Submitted
Counsels for the DEFENDENT

12