Chapter 2 Offer and Acceptancese Law Doing Orven ann Accertance 27 we document. It is the acceptor’s duty to ask fo ly accepts the offer and if he d (Mackillican vs The Compagnie Mar fe acceptor cannot plead that he was notice is reasonably suff case provide a good paid for a week's boatd and lodging 1d stole some of their property. fe notice formed no part of the ler the contract had been entered Finally, we must note that even where adequate notice of the terms and conditions in a document has been given, the doctrine of fundamental protects the contracting party fromthe un- reasonable consequences of wide and sweeping exemption clauses. Thus a dry-cleaner’s terms that he will pay only eight times th of cleaning. iarges. for any sonable (M. Siddalingappa vs T. Nataraj)"* 7. An offer should not contain a term would amount to acceptance. ‘IOveeR ano AccerraNce — 29 ss Law 2. An offer lapses by not being accepted in the mode prescribed, or if no mode is prescribed, in some usual and reasonable manner. But, accor 1e offeree does not accept the offer according to the mode It is for the offeror to in the preseribed manner, and if he f have accepted the accep- tance, 3. An offer lapses by rejection. An offer lapses i \e offerce. The rejection may be e or implied. Im) has been rejected ress ie., by words spoken or writte makes a counter offer, tans LUSTRATIONS. (i) { offered 1 had already come 10 an end om ims 10 rejection of As offer and there 1s no ceflective only wh = C makes an offer to D by rer D writes a letter rejecting Before the rejection reaches C, D changes his acceptance. There would be a contract between C and D and shall not be eftes 4, An offer offeree before acceptance. If the offer acceptance, the offer lapses provided that comes to the knowledge of the accept uage of the Secti ay be int ance of the death or insal rise fo a contract. Thus the put an end to the offer unt acceptance. An offerec’s sanity of the offeror or the jes or becomes insane before See. 6 red that an acceptance in ign id acceptance, and gives offeror would not accept for him (Reynolds vs 1840), 3 Beav. 334 (1921), 125 1.7, 690. 166). LAR EEX 109Orren anp Accerrance 31 wheat for Rs ie sale of wheat by n end. In the same ier of the private i wner, an offer may THE ACCEPTANCE, A contract, as already observed, emerges from 1 the offer Legal Rules Regarding a Valid Acceptance ‘A valid acceptance must be in conformity wit 1. Acceptance must be given only by the person to why An offer larly an offer An offer made nowledge of 1857), 157 ER 232,32. Rustees Law -ceptance of terms of the 3. Acceptance must be expressed in some usual and reasonable ners unless the proposal prescribes the manner In which His (0 be nee rie mode of acceptance, the accepted acceptance icated according to s mode. The are by word of is given by words spoke led an express acceptance, When acceptance is iven by « n implied or tacit acceptance. Implied accep- tance may be given either by doing some required act, for example, tracing the lost goods for the announced reward, or by example, stej ic bus by a passenger acceptance, the accept and by condi by post or tele acceptance effective and prescribed mode? ns if the offeree deviates from the the answer to this query is given in Section 7(2) itself es “the proposer may Po OrreR ano Accerrance 33 ly be causing a lot Mental acceptance ineffectual. Mental acceptance or quiet assent evidenced by words or conduct does not a ‘eptance; and this is so even where the offeror has sa of acceptance he offeror, otherwise it spoken into a telephone after ere is in effect no acceptance, This rule is jeory of consensus ad idem 6r of identity of minds. Unless ie acceptance of the offer -phew's horse ey, an auctioneer, to reserve it for his eT hear no rephew sent no mistake, an hat as there was Ao person received fetter in his drawer and forgot al acceptance did not ‘acceptance a) (Brogden vs Metropolitan Rly. Co") 4. Acceptance must be communicated by the acceptor. For an accep- tance to be valid, it must not only be made by the offeree but must also be communicated by, or with the authority of, the offeree (or acceptor) to the offeror. ILLUSTRATION. In Powell vs Lee, P was a candidate for the post of but P received no other led, and P” was not appointed to 1 breach of contract. The Co from the Committee there was 5. Acceptance must be given within a reasonable time and before the offer lapses and/or is revoked. To be legally effective acceptance must be given wit vs Zenith Chemical Works Pr 163), 7 LA 835; 1877), AC, 66. (1908), 99 LT 284, PAIR (1991) Bom, 211wle in November and he it was held that the offeror M could n andl could not be accepted id be accepted had 7. Rejected offers can be accepted only, if renewed. Offer once c less a fresh offer is made (/fyde vs ade by the offeror. The q res not arise, for, in suc fe services of the Jes by the contracting parties bec it is not always easy to ascert .e is made or revoked. In these cases the 5, will be applicable: fand an accep down the knowledge of the person to Whom itis made, ie offer roaches the offeree. iin a course of tra st the acceptor, when it comes + of acceptance is jouse to B for Orren ann Acceerance 35 letter reaches J¥ on 8th instant 1¢ offeree, receive’ the letter as against 1, n of a revoca put so as f0 be o4 power revoking, ie. when the letler of revocation is 1d (b) as against the person to whom it is made, when it comes letter of revocation is received by him tration (i) given above, A revokes his offer The letter reaches J on i. The revocation is when the letter of revocation is posted. It is complete is received by he person to ptance can be revoked. above, there arises a question: wh ther the revocation of aeceptance by B necessary to know bbe revoked. Section 5 deals with and provides as follows: time before “Applying Section 5 to our illustrations given above: A may revoke fer at any before or at the moment when B posts his letter of nce i.e., 9th, but not afterwards. B may revoke his acceptance at any before or at the moment when the letter of acceptance reaches 4 e., bbut not afterwards, While discussing the rule regarding ‘communica~ ‘we have observed earlier that the revocation of offer is letter of revocation itself fe., 9th, A’s revocation of his offer, which is complete as again erative. B's acceptance is valid and there shall be a bind36 Busines Law evoke hit is acceptance by communicating only when ide over the repeats it and | hear ‘when | do not hear, but only the sec: BR, 493, 959), ALR, MP. 24.‘Orre ano Accerrance 39 le for acceptance subsequ no offer avai 4. P sold “Acceptat Is because 1 specific offer made (Boulton vs Jones) | leter of acceptance and Hint. Yes, ‘of acceptance is valid because the acceptor may shop. with a peice ag ofConsideration contract (See. 10). fe the safeguard of \ce serves to distinguish those promises bound from those whi ration of some sort that a nudum pactum, out any compensation and a man cannot be words of Blackstone: nt made without considerati neither doing nor pron ne for my money, my promis not be redressed by can be enforced by law against isce, that such prot ie Pollock has observed: nguiage of purchase 1¢ promise or any other person has ss or abstains fro Consierarion 41 following four components: (a) the act or abstinence or promise which forms the consideration for the promise, must be done at the desire of the promisor;- (@) it must be done by the promisee or any other person; (©) it may have been already executed or is in the process of being done or may be si (A) it must be something to whi ILLUSTRATIONS. (0) 4 agrees to sel promise to pay the su house to B for Rs I ‘OF Rs 10,000 is the considera sell the house is the considerat A promises to mai for the purpose. Here the prot in B's child and B promises to pay A Rs 1,000 ‘of each party is the consideration for the promise who owes to grant time to C accordingly. Here the ‘year on B's in return B promises yonth. The promise to each party is the consideration for the © of the other party. ") A person had a daughter to marry and in order to raise funds for her 2¢ he intended to sell a property. His son promised that if the father would he would pay the father Rs. $0,000. The father accordingly forbore. stinence of the father is the consideration for son's promise to pay. Essentials of V: ion of consideration (given Is of valid consideration, We now discuss these essentials one by one in detail 1, Consideration must move at the desire of the promisor. In order to constitute legal consideration, the act or abstinence forming the consid eration for the promise must be done at the desire or request of the promi rendered voluntarily, or at the desire of thitd amount to valid consideration so as to support a contract. for this may be found in the worry and expense to which every ibjected, if he were obliged to pay for services, which he does need or require. shi louse on fire a extinguishing it him to come forISTRAT 3 BRI). 4 Mad 1e promisor’s request, TONS. (a) f 8 stranger to the consideration can sue on a contract, pro Alerwards 17. ¥y other person. This means sometimes called as ‘ a deed of gif, made the daughter should by A. Accordingly, on the same le C agreci ise saying that promisee. It was in Section 2 (d) cle Consiper rion 43 le, was a stranger a strang Fact as there was a separate contract between him and R. the hot have sued on the basis of ‘gift deed” executed by 4 in favour of ® because he was not a party to it A stranger (o a contract cannot ste. A persor the consideration b1 er {0 a contract carmot sue, only a person who is a par contract can sue on it.” Thus, where A mortgages ideration of B's promise to 4 to pay 4’s debt against B to enforce his promise, C being no party to the contract between A and B (Is Pillai vs Sonnivavern’) settler and the sfers certain properties to to be held by B in FAL AF can enforce the agreement é (LK Rapai vs 4 to sue the Post Office in case ah vs Central Gi Family settlement. Where a provision igement for mai oy family a members, though not parties to the agreement, can sue on 12 of the arrangement ILLUSTRATION. A daughter hher father whereby I be conveyed to the mother, On a WS parva)” (if) When the defendant constitutes him ratty: Thus iT receives some money from B to be paid over to C and he admits of this receipt to C, then C can recover 11915), 38 Mad, 753. *(1965), ALR, Ker, 203, 71959), AULL.. 271 957), ALR. AP 965If both parties ne of the agreement wwe done Consierarion 45 0 Band B pays its price 12 remains to be he agreed ted by promise ides. It is to be observed ate to the pro agreement. The Law only insists ou the presence of ‘LiL Tt leaves the people free to make his motorcar worth Rs ent is free, the agreement is a valid wequacy of However, if be grossly or shoc if one of the consent was obtained by frat adequacy of consider being no bar to a valid contract, unle: i, it has been correctly observed that 6 expediency or common sense.” sideration need not be ade- must be real and legal, uncertain possible. A promise to do something which is physi- possible, e.g., to make a dead man alive or to run at a speed of 100 res per hour, does not form46 Business Law e.g. promise for 1 to good considera- tion. (iif) Uncertain consideration. A promise to do some! ich vague and uncertain, e.g., a promise to pay such remuneration “as shall be the eye of law. sory or deceptive con: nnsideration, Consideration is illusory duty, oF to perforin a contract the wages (i) Forbearance to sue. Forbearance to sue, at the consideration. 4, has a right to sue his debtor B agreed to pay Rs ideration for the promise, being later on sue B for Rs 5,100. Bi there must be existing and law! ise of a disputed oF rent of compro- No Contract” ments of a vi ne of the essen Legality of the Object 1831), LB. & Ad. 950, 1809), 2 Camp. 317, 929). 116 1 719. Consweration 47 fe general rule is that “an agreément made without consideration is void.” But there are a few exceptions to the where an agreement with« consideration will be perfectly valid and binding. These exceptions are as follows: 1. Agreement made on account of natural love and affect 25 (1)}. An agreement made without consideratio expressed in writing, and (ji) registered under the law for the stration of documents, and is (iif) made account of @ near relation must be jderation, as per jon, to give to B () 4 for natural promise to B (©) A registered agree omised (0 pay ‘younger br ot carrying out the .greem be noted thi to writing and registers it, This is a reby an elder brother, on accou ius where @ Hindu between him and his wife, executed a regi agreeing to pay for separate residence that the agreement was v 1 of con ‘de out of natural love and affection. (Rajlakhi Devi vs Bhoomnathy 2. Agreement to compensate for past voluntary service (Sec.25 (2)} {A promise made without consideration is also valid, if it is a promise to n part, a person who has alrea ng for the promisor,’or done something which the promisor was legally competlable to do. ISTRATIONS. (a) 4 give A Re 50, This is a contract.” (6) A supports B's infant son. B px B ally bo ives it to him. B promises 10 This ie the service that act between A 1 to altract this exception, appended to Sectt rendered at the desire of the pr as per See. 2(d)] isor must be in existence vices were rendered me the service was ler for a company as himself done has done nothing for ness but refused (Abdulla Khan vs the service has been rendered need not be promisee ci n that case ob- by a person of full view of See. 25(2) of the C the time the thing was done 1 ney borrowed Conswerarion 49 compensate (e., a promise to repay the foan) on the part of the borrower. nor after attaining majority to repay money his minority has been held invalid and beyond the purview n 25(2) of the Contract Act (Indran Ramaswami vs Anthappa’*) (vi) The service rendered must also be legal. Thus past cohabitation wi not make a promise to pay for it enforceable under this exception (Sabava vs Yamanapp 3. Agreement to pay'a time-barred debt [Sec. 25 (3)}. Where there made in writing and signed by the debtor or by his au- ly or in part a debt barred by the law of limi- id even though it is not supported by any con- fed debt cannot be recovered and therefore a promise ithout consideration, hence the importance of the tof jon (Pestonji ier personal capacity in payme \e- jot be brought ‘express promise to pay’ a time barred debt as yma mere ‘acknowledgement of a liability’ in respect of a a debtor’s letter to his creditor, “I owe you Rs 1,000 on account of my time-barred promissory note” is not a contract. There must be 2 distinct_promise-to_pay; and (iv) the promise must be in wri ing and signed by the debtor or his agent. Au ot nforceable. The Tagie debt is not destroyed bu he remedy is revived by a new A signs a written promise to pay B Rs 500 1 (Appended to See. 25), 4. Completed gift. A gift (which is not a iderati order to be valid. “As betweet any gift act agreement) does not require 910 (B). 35 Bom. LR. 345. see also Hussenally vs Dinbat, 26 Bom. L.R, 252. 16 Mad. 1.1. 422, See also Suraj Narain vs Sukh Ahir, (1929), 51 Al 928), Rom, 1.R, 1407,rc Consirnation 51 50. Busmirss Law ‘cannot Nap. 195,