Friend of our site


MMA Headlines


UFC HP


Bleacher Report


MMA Fighting


MMA Torch


MMA Weekly


Sherdog (News)


Sherdog (Articles)


Liver Kick


MMA Mania


Bloody Elbow


MMA Ratings


Rating Fights


Yahoo MMA Blog


Search this site



Latest Articles


News Corner


MMA Rising


Audio Corner


Oddscast


Sherdog Radio


Eddie Goldman


Video Corner


Fight Hub


Special thanks to...

Link Rolodex

Site Index


To access our list of posting topics and archives, click here.

Friend of our site


Buy and sell MMA photos at MMA Prints

Site feedback


Fox Sports: "Zach Arnold's Fight Opinion site is one of the best spots on the Web for thought-provoking MMA pieces."

« | Home | »

Acceptance of Indian Contract Act

By Zach Arnold | January 21, 2022

Print Friendly and PDF

The terms of the offer must be safe and clear in order to create a valid contract, it must not be ambiguous. This statement is described by Anson, who refers to the revocation of the proposal and its acceptance. The declaration is generally governed by English law. The separate statement is as follows: The word “acceptance” is broadly defined in our Indian Contract Act of 1872 under section 2(b). It says, “If the person to whom the proposal is submitted indicates his or her approval of the proposal, it is said that it will be accepted.” [2] This rule of acceptance states that it is not enough to get a person to accept the offer, but also to convince him to do the same action. If this does not happen, so that it is not considered a valid contract, for example – the director of the airline has accepted a draft contract for the supply of new seats in the vehicle, but the manager has not communicated its acceptance to the supplier and due to delays in delivery, the case was dealt with in court and the court says that there was no valid contract, because there is no valid contract, because there is no notification of acceptance by the airline manager. `A` accepted the sale of the property to `B` through a written document stating that “this offer will remain until Friday 9am”. On Thursday, `A` signed a contract to sell the property to `C`. `B` heard about it from `X` and on Friday at 7 a.m. he delivered `A` acceptance of his offer. Hero `B` could not accept A`s offer after knowing that it had been revoked by selling the property to C. Something similar happened in Dunlop v. Higgins [6], in which Dunlop, the Higgins plaintiff, offered the defendants to sell a certain quantity of goods at a certain price.

The letter of offer was sent and received by the applicants on January 30. The letter of admission was sent the same day, but due to bad weather, the acceptance reached the defendants on February 1 instead of January 31. The phone conversation is the same as a conversation between two people in the same room. therefore, the acceptance rule applies here. The acceptance rule means that in order to conclude a contract, acceptance must reach the tenderer, i.e. he must be aware of the acceptance. This is in contrast to postal regulations, in which the contract enters into force at the moment the letter of acceptance is sent by the destination recipient. This is very well justified, since telephone conversations are therefore an immediate means of communication; it can reasonably be assumed that acceptance has been obtained, whereas in the case of postal communication it takes some time for acceptance to be obtained. It is important to know that any contract entered into under this law is an agreement, but it is also important to note that not every agreement is a contract. An agreement becomes a contract if it fulfils the essential elements provided for by contract law. These key points include in Somasundaram Pillai v.

The Provincial Government of Madras, the court ruled that the bidder was free to withdraw its will prior to the final approval of the provisional acceptance if it is expressly stated in the terms of the contract that a provisionally accepted bid cannot subsequently be cancelled. 11. Invalid Contract 2(j): A contract becomes void if it is no longer enforceable by law. The primary law governing the various aspects of the formation, acceptance, revocation or performance of contracts is the Indian Contract Act of 1872. For a contract to enter into force, certain elements must be fulfilled, namely- thefactfactor.com/facts/law/civil_law/contract_laws/indian_contract_act/communication-of-acceptance/2575 Therefore, the contract enters into force at the moment when the letter of acceptance is abandoned by the target recipient. The party assigning the contracts has the indispensable power to blacklist the contractor. But in cases where the party is the state, the decision to blacklist may be subject to judicial review to ensure proportionality and the principle of natural justice. In Vijay Fire Protection Systems v Visakhapatnam Port Trust And Anr.

the tendering authorities have made it clear to the tenderers that only one brand of pump assemblies will be accepted. The authorities even gave bidders the opportunity to change bids at the last minute. The tenderer to whom the tender for the supply of goods was submitted refused to comply with the terms of the contract. As a result, the tenderers terminated the contract between them and the tenderer. The court ruled that the authorities` decision was not arbitrary and that they had the right to do so. This article was written by Avni Kaushik. She is talking about the offer and acceptance under the Indian Contracts Act. With the advent of information technology in the 21st century, forms of communication have changed over time and people have moved on to new forms of communication such as email, fax, telephone, etc. Initially, offer and acceptance were mainly in the form of postal communication, but today we have various forms of communication that are much faster and more convenient, such as emails, and we call them instant forms of communication. Today, for the purposes of commercial contracts, e-mail is the most important. With the change in communication methods, many questions are therefore raised before the courts, e.B when a contract is calculated and when a contract is concluded that differs from the postal mode of communication.

Another mode that has prevailed since the 90s is that of telephone and telex services. The Indian Contract Act, 1872[1] prescribes the Contracts Act in India and is the principal law governing Indian contract law. The law is based on the principles of English common law. It applies to all states of India. It determines the circumstances in which the commitments entered into by the Contracting Parties are legally binding. Pursuant to paragraph 2(h), the Indian Contracts Act defines a contract as a legally enforceable agreement. Most people feel that only contracts properly written on paper and signed by the respective parties can be enforced. However, it is important to know that in today`s information technology era, most contracts are not written and do not always have to be signed. A contract is simply an agreement between two or more parties to do something (or refrain from doing something) in exchange for some form of consideration. With this in mind, there is no reason why a contract concluded by e-mail should not be legally enforceable.

For example, Mr. A sent Mr.B a proposal to make a promise to sell his house for Rs 10,000,000 and sent a letter on July 5, 2019. This position reached Mr.B on July 7, 2019 and Mr.B accepted his offer and sent a letter to Mr. A for acceptance. However, neither Mr A nor Mr.B can revoke his promise and acceptance. However, they can only be revoked if the communication between the two parties is not over. In D.S. Constructions Ltd v. Rites Ltd, the court ruled that the bidder had made changes to the terms of its bid within the time limit, but that the changes had only been partially accepted by the other party, without the bidder`s consent that led to the rejection of the contract and thus the complete absence of a contract. Therefore, the money deposited by the party cannot be confiscated. In Rajasthan State Electricity Board vs Dayal Wood Work, orders were placed in the form of a supply agreement. However, the offer to purchase itself contained the provision that the bidder may refuse delivery of the goods.

In the present case, the court held that no contract concluded had entered into force and that the contractor was therefore free to repay its advance payment. It is very important that the acceptance is communicated, as it cannot be considered a binding contract without acceptance. On September 8, 1817, that is, before the defendants received the acceptance, the defendants sold the goods to another person. The plaintiffs filed a lawsuit for breach of contract. The court ruled that once the letter of acceptance was sent by the plaintiffs, the contract came into effect and that, as a result, the plaintiffs were held liable for selling the goods to another person. .

Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |

Comments are closed.