Indian Contract Act Notes for Judiciary Exam Preparation Tips

Author : Yogricha

Updated On : June 6, 2024

SHARE

Overview: The Indian Contract Act, 1872 was enacted during British colonial rule and continues to be the primary source of contract law in the country.

The act defines the legal framework for entering into and enforcing contracts in India. Indian Contract Act is asked in all State Judiciary Exams and therefore if you are a Judiciary Aspirant you must ensure that you prepare Indian Contract Act in entirety while focusing on the Important sections. In this article we have given you a list of all the sections that are important for your preparation.

Also we have curated notes for your preparation of Contact act for Judiciary, Law exams and Law School exams.

In this article we will cover:

  1. Important sections of Indian Contract Act for Judiciary
  2. Tips on how to prepare Indian Contract Act
  3. Notes for your preparation.
  4. Downloadable notes on Indian Contract Act
  5. Questions for practice
  6. Download other Study Material for your preparation

Download Study Material For Judiciary Exams by Judiciary Gold

Know more: Everything About Judiciary Exams

Important Sections under Indian Contract Act

Here are the most important sections of ICA for Judiciary Exams:

  • Section 2: Interpretation-clause.
  • Section 3: Communication, acceptance and revocation of proposals.
  • Section 4: Communication when complete.
  • Section 5: Revocation of Proposals and acceptance.
  • Section 6: Revocation how made.
  • Section 10: What agreements are contracts?
  • Section 11: Who are competent to contract?
  • Section 12: What is a sound mind for the purposes of contracting?
  • Section 13: “Consent” defined.
  • Section 14: “Free consent” defined.
  • Section 15: “Coercion” defined.
  • Section 16: “Undue influence” defined.
  • Section 17: “Fraud” defined.
  • Section 18: “Misrepresentation” defined.
  • Section 20: Agreement void where both parties are under mistake as to matter of fact.
  • Section 21: Effect of mistake as to law.
  • Section 22: Contract caused by mistake of one party as to matter of fact.
  • Section 23: What consideration and objects are lawful, and whatnot.
  • Section 24: Agreements void, if consideration are objects unlawful in part.
  • Section 25: Agreement without consideration, void, unless it is in writing and registered or is a promise to compensate for something done or is a promise to pay a debt barred by limitation law.
  • Section 26: Agreement in restraint of marriage, void.
  • Section 27: Agreement in restraint of trade, void.
  • Section 28: Agreements in restrain of legal proceedings, void.
  • Section 29: Agreements void for uncertainty.
  • Section 30: Agreements by way of wager, void.
  • Section 31: “Contingent contract” defined
  • Section 36: Agreement contingent on impossible events void
  • Section 38: Effect of refusal to accept offer of performance
  • Section 43: Any one of joint promisors may be compelled to perform
  • Section 55: Effect of failure to perform at fixed time, in contract in which time is essential
  • Section 56: Agreement to do impossible act.
  • Section 62: Effect of novation, rescission, and alteration of contract.
  • Section 63: Promisee may dispense with or remit performance of promisee
  • Section 62: Effect of novation, rescission, and alteration of contract.
  • Section 68: Claim for necessaries supplied to person incapable of contracting, or on his account
  • Section 69: Reimbursement of person paying money due by another, in payment of which he is interested
  • Section 70: Obligation of person enjoying benefit of non-gratuitous act
  • Section 71: Responsibility of finder of good
  • Section 73: Compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract
  • Section 74: Compensation for breach of contract where penalty stipulated for
  • Section 75: Party rightfully rescinding contract, entitled to compensation
  • Section 124: “Contract of indemnity” defined.
  • Section 125: Right of indemnity-holder when sued.
  • Section 126: “Contract of guarantee”, “surety”, “principal debtor” and “creditor”.
  • Section 129: Continuing guarantee.
  • Section 134: Discharge of surety by release or discharge of principal debtor.
  • Section 135: Discharge of surety when creditor compounds with, gives time to, or agrees not to sue, principal debtor.
  • Section 138: Release of one co-surety does not discharge other.
  • Section 139: Discharge of surety by creditor’s act or omission impairing surety’s eventual remedy.
  • Section 172: “Pledge”, “Pawnor”, and “Pawnee” defined.
  • Section 173: Pawnee’s right of retainer.
  • Section 176: Pawnee’s right where pawnor makes default.
  • Section 182: “Agent” and “principal” defined.
  • Section 197: Ratification may be expressed or implied.

Tips on how to prepare Indian Contract Act

If you are a Judiciary Aspirant, then you have to make sure that you do a proper trend analysis of the question papers of all the previous years. Take the question papers of all the target states and note down all the important sections. Here are keypointers you need to take a note for Judiciary preparation for Indian Contract Act.

  1. Make a list of the important sections that have been asked in the previous Year Judiciary exams.
  2. Start with reading the bare act. You can also refer to the important sections mentioned below.
  3. Make your own notes after understanding all the key pointers.
  4. As contract act is asked in majority of the prelims and mains examinations and therefore you have to prepare for MCQs and Written examination both.
  5. Prepare for Prelims and Mains together while understanding all the concepts.

Learn more: Judiciary Exam 2023 Online Coaching

Notes on Indian Contract Act for Judiciary Preparation

Introduction:

The Contract law is rooted in civil principles, where remedies for breaches primarily involve compensatory and liquidated or unliquidated damages. This legal framework is designed to uphold rights in personam, which are rights claimable exclusively against specific individuals or entities.

The Indian Contract Act of 1872, effective since September 1st, 1872, stands as the codified law governing contracts in India. Section 2 of this act furnishes definitions for critical terms, including 'contract.'

Essential Components of Contracts:

Contracts are defined as legally enforceable agreements, and they hinge on several vital components:

  1. Involvement of Two or More Parties
  2. Capacity to Contract
  3. Free and Voluntary Consent – Parties should not be subject to coercion or deceit.
  4. Lawful Consideration and Lawful Object – Consideration represents what one party commits to do or abstain from doing for the other party, while object pertains to the purpose behind the contract.
  5. Agreement Not Expressly Declared Void – Contracts must not be explicitly prohibited by law.

Stages of Contract Formation:

A contract commences with a proposal or an offer, wherein one party expresses their willingness to perform or abstain from an action in exchange for something of value. The individual making the offer is termed the 'offeror,' and those accepting it are referred to as 'offerees.'

Read About:  Judiciary Exam Preparation Tips

The Key Provisions of the Indian Contract Act of 1872:

When entering into a contract, several crucial provisions must be observed. Below, we discuss some of these provisions:

  1. Offer and Acceptance: A contract necessitates the involvement of at least two parties, one of whom extends an offer, while the other accepts it. The party making the offer is referred to as the "promisor," and the one accepting it is known as the "promisee."

  2. Intention to Create a Legal Relationship: For a contract to be valid, it must have the potential to establish a legal relationship between the parties involved. A contract lacking the capacity to create a legal relationship is deemed invalid. It is imperative that the contract is legally binding and enforceable by the law.

  3. Free Consent: All parties to the contract must genuinely agree to the same terms and conditions, interpreting them in the same manner. The concept of free consent precludes any form of coercion, fraud, or misrepresentation of facts. If a party's consent is obtained under duress, the contract becomes voidable.

  4. Capacity of the Parties: The Indian Contract Act of 1872 stipulates that individuals who have reached the age of majority, possess sound mental faculties, and are not prohibited by the law have the capacity to enter into a contract. Contracts involving minors are void ab initio, as minors lack the legal capacity to contract. Similarly, individuals with unsound minds are also unable to enter into contracts.

Read About: Preparation Plans for the Judicial Services Exam

Essentials of the Indian Contract Act, 1872:

The fundamental requirements for a valid contract under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, are detailed as follows:

  1. Offer and Acceptance: A legal contract necessitates a lawful offer extended by one party and a lawful acceptance of that offer by the other party. An offer signifies a proposal to undertake an action, and acceptance denotes an agreement to the terms of the offer. Effective communication of the offer and acceptance between the parties is vital.
  2. Intention to Create Legal Relations: The parties entering the contract must genuinely intend to establish a legal relationship, and the agreement should not be of a purely social or domestic nature. In essence, the parties must intend for the contract to be legally binding.
  3. Lawful Object: The object or purpose of the contract must adhere to the principles of legality. It should not involve any illegal activities or actions contrary to public policy.
  4. Consideration: Every contract must be supported by valid consideration, which entails something of value exchanged between the parties. This consideration can encompass currency, goods, services, or a commitment to perform or abstain from specific actions. The presence of consideration is a prerequisite for the contract's enforceability.
  5. Capacity of Parties: The parties entering into the contract must possess the legal capacity to do so. This entails sound mental faculties and the absence of legal disqualifications, such as minority or incapacity due to unsoundness of mind.
  6. Free Consent: Consent to the contract must be voluntarily given, free from any form of coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation, or mistake. Contracts obtained through any of these vitiating factors may be voidable.
  7. Certainty and Possibility of Performance: The contract's terms must be clear and definite, with the contract's performance being possible. Vague or uncertain terms should not form the basis of the agreement.
  8. Legal Formalities: Certain contracts may necessitate adherence to specific legal formalities as prescribed by law, such as written agreements, registration, or witnessing.
  9. Not Expressly Declared Void or Illegal: The contract must not be explicitly declared void or illegal under the Indian Contract Act or any other Indian law.
  10. Agreements Not Declared as Void: The contract should not fall within any category of agreements that are expressly declared void by the Act. For instance, agreements without consideration or involving wagering are typically considered void.
  11. Possibility of Performance: The contract should be capable of being performed, and if unforeseen circumstances render performance impossible beyond the parties' control, it may lead to the contract's discharge.

Read about: Upcoming Judiciary Exams

Consideration:

Consideration in a contract refers to the mutual agreement of both parties to undertake or abstain from certain actions. Several essential elements of consideration must be met, some of which are discussed below:

  1. Consensual Origin: Consideration must originate from the promisor's desire, meaning that the act should be performed or refrained from at the promisor's request. Voluntary actions or actions prompted by a third party do not constitute valid consideration.

  2. Source of Consideration: As long as a contract involves lawful consideration, it is not essential to identify the provider of that consideration. The promisor's consent allows the consideration to come from anyone other than the promisee.

  3. Types of Consideration: Consideration in a contract can be categorized into three types:

  • Past Consideration: This involves a voluntary action performed in the past, which enables a party to enter into the contract to undertake or abstain from an action. This is referred to as past consideration.
  • Present Consideration: Also known as executed consideration, this pertains to an action performed in response to a positive promise.
  • Future Consideration: Often called executory consideration, it involves the promisor making an offer, and the promisee accepting the offer with the intention of executing the contract at a future date.

Real and Legally Possible:

Consideration in a contract must be physically and legally feasible. Uncertain consideration renders the contract unenforceable, and if the consideration is physically or legally impossible, the contract is void in the eyes of the law.

Visit Now: Take Free Classes on Indian Contract Act

Lawful Consideration:

For a contract to be valid, it must be in accordance with the law. Consideration is deemed unlawful under the following circumstances:

  • When it is legally prohibited.
  • When it causes harm to another person or their property.
  • When it is against public policy.

Remedies in Case of Breach of Contract:

In cases where a breach of contract occurs, remedies are available to the aggrieved party. These remedies include:

  1. Damages: The party suffering losses due to the breach can seek compensation from the party responsible for the breach.
  2. Injunction: The aggrieved party can request the court to issue an order for the other party to either perform a specific action or refrain from doing something, in accordance with the terms of the contract.
  3. Arbitration: When disputes cannot be resolved through negotiation, arbitration may be used. An arbitrator listens to both sides and makes a decision in the interest of both parties.
  4. Specific Performance: The aggrieved party can approach the court to compel the party in breach to fulfill specific obligations as outlined in the contract.
  5. Rescission: This remedy involves the complete cancellation of the contract, allowing for the return of money or goods exchanged between the parties.

The concept of a proposal in the Indian Contract Act of 1872 is defined under Section 2(a). It states that a proposal occurs when an individual expresses to another their readiness to perform or refrain from an action, aiming to gain the latter's agreement to such behavior or non-behavior. This proposal must be clear and precise, and it needs to be conveyed to the other individual with the intent to secure their consent. When this proposal is accepted, it transforms into a promise, and the agreed terms establish the contractual obligations for both parties. However, if the proposal is not accepted, it is merely seen as an invitation to negotiate and does not establish any legal responsibilities for either party.

Examples:

  1. Company A sends a written email offering to sell its products to Company B at a specified price. This written communication constitutes a proposal, and if Company B accepts, it transforms into a legally binding contract.
  2. During a conversation, Person A orally offers to sell their car to Person B for a particular amount. This verbal offer is also considered a proposal, and if Person B agrees, it results in a binding contract.
  3. A construction company, Company A, submits a comprehensive proposal to a government agency, Company B, outlining the construction project's details, including cost, timeline, and specifications. This proposal serves as an offer to enter into a contract with the government agency, and upon the agency's acceptance, it becomes a legally binding contract.

Read about: How to Prepare for Judiciary Exams from Scratch

What Is an Invitation to Offer?

An invitation to offer is a preliminary communication that encourages or invites someone to make an offer or proposal, rather than constituting an offer itself. It serves as an invitation to negotiate or initiate an offer, with no legal obligation to accept any resulting proposal.

In simpler terms, an invitation to offer is an invitation to start discussions or negotiations and does not create a legal obligation to accept any offers that may arise from it.

Examples of invitations to offer encompass advertisements, price lists, catalogs, and product displays in a shop window or online store. These communications do not establish a binding offer but instead invite customers to propose purchasing.

For instance, when a shop owner displays goods in their store window, it is an invitation for customers to make offers to purchase those goods. The customer's offer to buy the goods at a specific price constitutes a proposal, and if the shop owner accepts it, a binding contract is formed.

Landmark Cases Involving Invitations to Treat/Offers:

  1. Pharmaceutical Products of India Ltd. v. Gwalior Chemical Works Ltd. (1960): In this case, the court affirmed that a price list serves as an invitation to treat, not an offer. It emphasized that a contract arises only when one party makes an offer and the other party accepts it.
  2. Fisher v. Bell (1961): This case established the precedent that displaying goods in a shop window or on a store shelf generally constitutes an invitation to treat, not an offer. The customer's offer to purchase the goods at a particular price is considered a proposal, and if the shop owner accepts, it forms a binding contract.
  3. Harvela Investments Ltd. v. Royal Trust Co. of Canada (1986): This case introduced the concept of an "invitation to tender," where a party invites potential contractors to submit bids for a project. The court ruled that an invitation to tender is not an offer but an invitation to present offers.

Get Details: Why Reading Bare Acts is necessary for Judiciary

Intent to Establish a Legal Relationship:

The intent to establish a legal relationship stands as a fundamental component in the formation of a contract. It signifies the parties' shared desire to create a legally enforceable agreement, one that holds legal weight and can be upheld in a court of law.

As a general principle, the law presumes that parties intend to establish a legal relationship when they engage in a contractual arrangement. Nevertheless, in specific scenarios, parties may not harbor an intention to forge a legally binding contract, particularly in social or domestic contexts. For instance, when friends agree to meet at a café, there may be no intent to create a contract that is legally binding.

For a contract to be valid and enforceable, the intent to establish a legal relationship must exist at the time of entering into the agreement. This implies that both parties must share a mutual intent to create legal relations.

This intent can be either expressed or implied. It may be expressly stated in the contract through the language employed, such as when the parties explicitly declare their intention to create a legally binding agreement. Conversely, the intent may be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the agreement. For example, if an individual provides a service and receives payment for it, there may be an implied intent to establish a legal relationship.

In cases where the parties lack the intent to establish a legal relationship, the agreement cannot be enforced as a contract. Consequently, the existence or absence of this intent plays a pivotal role in ascertaining the legitimacy of a contract.

The necessity of communicating an offer is emphasized in the landmark case of Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt, a significant contract law case decided by the Privy Council in 1913.

In this case, Lalman Shukla served as a laborer for Gauri Dutt, who happened to be Lalman's deceased father's uncle. Gauri Dutt had dispatched Lalman to search for his missing nephew and had offered a reward of Rs. 501 to anyone who successfully located him. However, before Lalman could return with the news of locating Gauri Dutt's nephew, Gauri Dutt became aware of his nephew's demise through other sources.

Subsequently, Gauri Dutt declined to fulfill his promise of the reward, contending that the offer of the reward was only valid for the purpose of finding his nephew alive, and since the nephew was now deceased, there was no outstanding offer to accept.

The court's ruling determined that no contract existed between the parties. It was established that Gauri Dutt's commitment to pay the reward constituted an offer, and Lalman's search for his nephew represented the acceptance of that offer. The court underlined the principle that an offer can be accepted through the performance of the requested action, and Lalman's search was indeed the fulfillment of the requested act.

The court dismissed Gauri Dutt's argument that the offer was exclusively meant for locating his nephew alive. The court clarified that the offer was not restricted to finding the nephew alive but encompassed the act of locating the nephew, irrespective of his vital status. Consequently, the court determined that Lalman had accepted the offer by executing the stipulated task, thereby obligating Gauri Dutt to honor the promised reward.

This case established the fundamental principle that an offer can be accepted through the performance of the specified action, and that an offer may pertain to a specific act rather than a particular outcome.

Types of Offers/Proposals:

Cross Offers: Cross offers occur when two parties unknowingly make identical offers to each other. In such instances, there is no clear indication of an intention to create a legally binding agreement. A notable case related to cross offers is Tinn v. Hoffman (1873), where both parties made matching offers without being aware of the other's offer, resulting in no contract due to the absence of acceptance.

Counter Offers: A counteroffer is a response to an initial offer that alters the terms of the original proposal. It effectively rejects the initial offer and terminates it. A significant case related to counter offers is Hyde v. Wrench (1840), where the plaintiff's counteroffer led to the rejection of the defendant's original offer, rendering any subsequent attempt to accept the original offer ineffective.

Specific and General Offers:

In contract law, offers can be classified into two main types: specific offers and general offers.

  1. Specific Offers: These are offers directed at a particular person or group. For instance, an offer to sell a car to a specific individual at a specific price is a specific offer. It can only be accepted by the intended recipient within the defined terms and timeframe.

  2. General Offers: These offers are extended to the public or a group of potential acceptors. An example is an advertisement offering a reward for the return of a lost item. Anyone meeting the conditions outlined in the offer can claim the reward.

The distinction between specific and general offers holds legal significance. In specific offers, the offeror must sell the item if the offeree accepts within the stipulated terms. In contrast, for general offers, the offeror is obliged to fulfill the offer only when someone meets the conditions and accepts it. This distinction shapes the legal implications and acceptance conditions associated with offers in contract law.

Know more: How to prepare for judiciary exams 

Types of Offers Based on Duration and Acceptance:

In contract law, offers can be categorized into distinct types according to their duration and conditions of acceptance. The three primary categories of offers are standing offers, open offers, and continuing offers.

Standing Offers: A standing offer is an offer directed at a specific individual or group and remains valid for a predetermined duration. It is a form of specific offer that remains open for acceptance throughout the specified timeframe. For instance, if a company offers to sell a particular product to a specific customer at a fixed price for a one-year period, this constitutes a standing offer.

Open Offers: An open offer is a type of general offer accessible to anyone who fulfills the specified criteria. It remains open for a reasonable duration and can be accepted by anyone meeting the designated conditions. For example, if a company offers a reward to anyone who returns a lost item, this qualifies as an open offer.

Continuing Offers: A continuing offer is an offer that remains available for a set period but can be accepted multiple times within that timeframe. For instance, if a company offers to supply a specific product to a customer at a fixed price for one year, and the customer can place orders for the product during that year, this represents a continuing offer.

It is important to recognize that the legal implications associated with these distinct offer types can differ. A standing offer can exclusively be accepted by the intended recipient(s) within the stipulated timeframe. An open offer is open to acceptance by anyone meeting the specified conditions within a reasonable timeframe. In contrast, a continuing offer can be accepted multiple times within the specified duration.

Get Details: Books for Judiciary Mains Exams 

What Is an Offer or Proposal?

The Indian Contract Act, Section 2(a), provides the definition of an offer or proposal. As per this Act, when an individual communicates their willingness to either undertake or abstain from a particular action in order to secure the agreement of another person, it constitutes a proposal. Put simply, when one person conveys their readiness to perform or refrain from an action for the benefit of another person, they are making a proposal.

For instance, when someone presents an offer to sell their bicycle to you at a specific price, let's say Rs. 5,000, this constitutes an actual offer. A contract comes into existence when both you and the seller reach an agreement regarding the sale, and all relevant details are clearly defined. Once you accept the offer, complete the payment of the agreed-upon amount of Rs. 5,000, and take possession of the bicycle, the contract is considered fulfilled or "executed."

What Is an 'Invitation to Offer' or 'Invitation to Treat'?

An invitation to offer, or invitation to treat, does not involve a specific party's intent to enter into a contract. Instead, it signifies that the seller is open to entering into a contract with any member of the public who submits the most favorable offer. In essence, in an invitation to treat, it is the seller who is making the offer.

For instance, when a shopkeeper in an antique store wishes to sell antique statues, they are open to entering into a contract with the buyer offering the highest price. Similarly, when clothing items are displayed in a store, goods are presented in an auction, or advertisements announce discounts such as "Offer! 50% Off on All Shirts!"—these are all invitations to treat rather than actual offers.

As a result, the process of forming a contract differs between an invitation to treat and an offer. It commences with an invitation to treat, such as the display of goods and their prices. When an individual submits a satisfactory offer, and the seller accepts it, a contract is then established. In contrast to an offer initiated by the seller to the buyer, an invitation to treat empowers the buyer to initiate the contractual process.

The Role of Intention:

In the context of offers and invitations to treat, intention plays a significant role. In an offer, both parties harbor the intent to enter into a legally binding agreement following a proper negotiation. Conversely, such intent is not present in an invitation to offer. For instance, a person might visit a store on their way home from work, peruse through displayed books or clothing without the immediate intention of making a purchase. Similarly, sellers may choose not to sell their goods to a specific customer if the customer is unwilling to meet the desired price.

In an offer, there exists a clear intent to establish a contract, while an invitation to offer does not carry the same intent. It allows for greater flexibility and negotiation between the involved parties before arriving at a final agreement.

Know More: Why solving previous year's question papers is important

Differences Between Offer and Invitation to Offer:

Here are the distinctions between an offer and an invitation to treat:

Definition:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer is not an offer itself; it signifies a willingness to engage in contract negotiations.
  • Offer: An offer occurs when someone expresses their willingness to perform or refrain from an action to secure the other party's agreement.

Purpose:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer aims to solicit an offer from the other party.
  • Offer: An offer is presented to obtain acceptance from the other party.

Defined In:

  • Invitation to offer: The concept of an invitation to offer is not explicitly defined in the Indian Contract Act 1872.
  • Offer: The definition of an offer is provided in section 2(a) of the Indian Contract Act 1872.

Acceptance:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer can transform into an offer if accepted by the other party.
  • Offer: An offer becomes a binding agreement upon acceptance by the other party.

Legal Consequences:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer does not lead to legal consequences.
  • Offer: An offer results in legal consequences and can serve as the foundation for a contract.

Made To:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer can be extended to a group.
  • Offer: An offer is typically made to a specific party.

Example:

  • Invitation to offer: A bookseller sending a catalog of books with prices listed.
  • Offer: If an individual interested in any book from the catalog offers to purchase it from the seller.

Read about: How to make a career in Judiciary

Agreement:

The concept of an agreement is outlined in section 2(e) of the Indian Contract Act 1872. An agreement constitutes a form of promise between two parties, and it inherently involves consideration. A notable illustration of an agreement is a rental agreement. In a rental agreement, both parties (the property owner and the tenant) participate, and consideration takes the form of monetary payment, typically rent.

There are several critical aspects that are essential to an agreement, including:

  1. Parties: An agreement invariably involves a minimum of two parties, but it can encompass more than two, contingent upon the circumstances or conditions.
  2. Offer: A pivotal component of an agreement is the presence of an offer between the parties. One party must proffer an offer to the other, and this offer is explicitly stated within the agreement.
  3. Acceptance: Upon the presentation of an offer by one party, it is imperative that the other party accepts the offer. The acceptance must align with the will or intention of the accepting party.
  4. Promises: Both parties within the agreement commit to fulfilling all the duties and obligations as stipulated in the agreement.
  5. Consideration: Consideration signifies the exchange of value, typically in monetary or other tangible forms, as a price for the promises made within the agreement.

Know More: Eligibility for Judiciary Exams

Section 3 of the Indian Contract Act 1872 - Communication of the Proposal:

Effective communication is pivotal for both legal and personal relationships. Communication of the proposal signifies that all the terms and conditions should be conveyed to the other party, ensuring clarity in the minds of both parties. Communication can take two forms: implied or expressed. Expressed communication occurs through written or spoken words, where one party conveys their viewpoint or conditions in writing or speech. In contrast, implied communication happens when one party comprehends the point or conditions without verbalizing them; no exchange of words occurs in implied communication.

The essential requirements for a valid agreement under this section include:

  1. Communication to Both Parties: The agreement should be communicated to both parties, whether in implied or expressed form. Failure to communicate the proposal can lead to doubts and misinterpretations, potentially causing confusion between the parties.
  2. Inclusion of a Promise: The proposal must incorporate a promise; without a promise, the agreement is void and unenforceable.
  3. Validity and Certainty: The proposal must be valid and certain, meaning the conditions mentioned in the contract or agreement must have a realistic possibility of being fulfilled. Immaterial or impossible clauses should not be included in the proposal.
  4. Expression of Intention: The proposal should clearly express the intentions of both the promisor and the promisee, minimizing misunderstandings regarding the proposal.
  5. Avoidance of Negative Statements: Negative statements should be avoided in the proposal, as they can create a negative impression and discord between the parties.
  6. Clear and Understandable Terms: The proposal should include all the terms and conditions intended for the contract, and these terms should be presented in simple, easily understandable language.
  7. Absence of False Statements or Fraud: The proposal should not contain false statements or any fraudulent elements.

A career in Judiciary in India - Life and Other Benefits

Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act - Completion of Communication: Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act states that communication is considered complete when it reaches the intended recipient. The communication is deemed accepted when the recipient acknowledges and accepts the contract or proposal.

Section 5 of the Indian Contract Act - Revocation of the Proposal and Acceptance:

The proposal can be revoked by the offering party before the communication is accepted by the promisee. For instance, if person X intends to sell their watch to person Y, X can revoke the agreement before Y accepts it. The proposal can be revoked at any time before the promisee's acceptance of the offer.

Section 6 of the Indian Contract Act – Revocation Methods:

6.1. Revocation may occur through the communication of a notice of revocation by the proposer to the other party.

6.2. Revocation can also happen by the lapse of time. If the other party does not accept the offer within the specified time frame, the proposer has the opportunity to revoke it. In cases where no specific time is prescribed, revocation can occur within a reasonable time based on the circumstances.

6.3. Revocation is possible by the failure to fulfill the conditions set by the acceptor. This means that if the contract fails to meet the conditions desired by the other party, it can be revoked.

6.4. Revocation may also take place upon the death of the proposer, provided that the acceptor becomes aware of the death before accepting the offer. If the proposer passes away before the acceptance of the agreement, the agreement can be revoked prior to acceptance.

Get details: Learn how to become a Civil Judge

Section 7 of the Indian Contract Act – Absolute Acceptance:

For the transformation of the proposal into a promise, acceptance:

7.1. Must be absolute and unqualified, as it holds significance in every agreement or contract.

7.2. Should be expressed in a reasonable manner to notify the other party of the acceptance. If the proposal specifies a particular method of acceptance and it is not adhered to, the proposer may, within a reasonable time, insist that the proposal be accepted in the prescribed manner. If the acceptor fails to comply, the acceptance is considered valid.

Section 8 of the Indian Contract Act – Acceptance by Performing, Conditions, or Receiving Consideration:

If the offer contains conditions, and the acceptor agrees to those conditions, it is deemed an acceptance of the offer by the acceptor. Similarly, if there is an acceptance of the consideration, it signifies acceptance of the proposal. Once the person accepts the consideration, they cannot return the goods.

Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act – Promises, Express and Implied:

This section addresses implied and expressed promises. If the proposal and acceptance are communicated through words or in writing, they are considered expressed promises. Conversely, promises made other than through words or writing are regarded as implied promises. For example, if person X parks their car, and person Z voluntarily starts cleaning the car, it is considered an implied offer as it is done by Z of their own volition.

What is a standard-form contract?

A standard-form contract is a pre-drafted contract in which the terms and conditions are fixed and not subject to negotiation. Typically, one party creates and provides this contract to the other party for signature. Standard-form contracts are also referred to as adhesion contracts or boilerplate contracts.

Know More: How to Become a Civil Judge in MP

Doctrine of Unconscionability

The doctrine of unconscionability empowers a court to refuse the enforcement of a contract if it is deemed to be unconscionable or oppressive to the party with less bargaining power. This implies that if the contract terms are excessively harsh or one-sided, a court may either declare the contract void or make modifications to ensure fairness.

Legal Safeguards

Several legal safeguards have been put in place to protect consumers, employees, and other parties with weaker bargaining positions in standard form contracts. For instance, the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 grants consumers the right to lodge complaints against unfair trade practices and promotes equitable competition.

Implied Clauses

On occasion, courts may insert certain clauses into a contract to safeguard the interests of the party with less bargaining power. For instance, in employment contracts, courts may imply a duty of good faith and equitable treatment on the part of the employer towards the employee.

Duty of Disclosure

The party with superior bargaining power is obligated to disclose any pertinent information that might influence the decision of the weaker party to enter into the contract. Failure to make such disclosures can lead to the contract being declared null and void.

Right to Rescind

The weaker party may possess the right to rescind the contract if they were induced to enter into it through misrepresentation, fraud, or undue influence.

Landmark Cases on Standard Form Contracts Road Transport Corporation v. Kirloskar Brothers In this case, the court ruled that contractual terms must be effectively communicated to the party intended to be bound by them. If a consignment note is not signed at the time of delivering goods for transportation, and the terms of the consignment note exclude the jurisdiction of specific courts, they are not binding on the consignor or consignee. Therefore, the court emphasized the importance of providing reasonable notice of contractual terms.

Acceptance According to the Indian Contract Act 1872

In accordance with the Indian Contract Act of 1872, acceptance represents the final and unambiguous expression of agreement with the terms outlined in a proposal. The manner and timing of acceptance should align with the proposal's specifications, or if no timeframe is stipulated, it must occur within a reasonable period.

Section 2(b) of the Act provides the following definition for acceptance:

"When the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted. A proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise."

A valid acceptance is characterized by the following criteria:

  1. It must come from the person to whom the proposal is directed.
  2. It must adhere to the method prescribed by the proposer.
  3. It must be tendered within the stipulated time or within a reasonable timeframe.
  4. It must be absolute and devoid of conditions.

Failure to meet the prescribed method or time for acceptance renders it invalid, and the proposer is no longer bound by the proposal. Furthermore, acceptance can take the form of an explicit or implicit response. Explicit acceptance is conveyed through spoken or written words, while implicit acceptance is inferred from the offeree's behavior.

Communication of Acceptance The principle "Acceptance must be communicated" is a fundamental tenet of contract law, signifying that the offeree's acceptance of a proposal or offer must be conveyed to the offeror for a contract to gain legal validity.

In essence, when one party extends an offer to another party, the latter must communicate their acceptance to the former for the contract to hold legal weight. This communication can be executed through various reasonable means, including written or oral communication or through actions. However, this communication must occur within a reasonable timeframe and must be unambiguous and unconditional.

Failure to communicate acceptance of an offer results in the absence of a contract, and the offeror is not bound by the terms of the offer. Hence, it is imperative for the offeree to communicate their acceptance within a reasonable timeframe to establish the legal validity of the contract.

Get Details: Madhya Pradesh Judiciary Exam 

Acceptance

Through Conduct Acceptance through conduct, also known as acceptance by performance or acceptance by behavior, is a contractual concept in which a contract is established through the actions or behavior of the parties involved. In this form of acceptance, there is no explicit communication of acceptance from the offeree to the offeror; instead, acceptance is inferred from the conduct of the offeree.

For example, when an individual places an order for a product online and the seller delivers the product without explicitly receiving formal acceptance, the buyer's acceptance is demonstrated through their conduct of accepting and using the product.

Acceptance through conduct is generally recognized as valid when the offeree's behavior aligns with the terms of the offer, clearly indicating their acceptance of the offer.

However, it's important to note that acceptance by conduct is only applicable when the offeror has effectively communicated the offer, and there is no requirement for the offer to be accepted through explicit communication. The conduct of the offeree must unambiguously indicate their acceptance of the offer.

A classic example of acceptance by conduct is the case of Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company, where the court ruled that the plaintiff's conduct (using the smoke ball as directed) constituted acceptance of the offer made by the defendant, resulting in the formation of a contract between the parties.

Completion of Communication: The Indian Contract Act, 1872 provides rules for determining when the communication of acceptance is considered complete. According to Section 4 of the Act, communication of acceptance is deemed complete in the following circumstances:

  1. As against the proposer (offeror): When the acceptance is dispatched, putting it on its way to the offeror, and it is beyond the control of the acceptor. This means that once the acceptance is sent via post or other authorized means, it is considered complete. Even if it is lost, delayed, or damaged in transit, it is still valid as long as it is correctly addressed, stamped, and sent.

  2. As against the acceptor (offeree): When the proposer becomes aware of the acceptance. If the acceptance is directly communicated to the offeror, either by the offeree themselves or through a messenger, communication of acceptance is complete as soon as the proposer is informed of it.

  3. When transmitted through an authorized means: If the acceptance is transmitted through a recognized and authorized method, such as postal service, telegraph, or fax, communication is considered complete when the message is sent.

Acceptance by Post : Acceptance by post is a common method of accepting an offer in contract law. It is based on the principle that communication is complete when the acceptance is dispatched, as outlined in Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. When an offeree accepts an offer by post, the communication of acceptance is considered complete as soon as the acceptance is posted. This means that the acceptance is legally effective even if it gets lost, delayed, or damaged in the postal system, as long as it is properly addressed, stamped, and posted.

Void Agreements

Under the Indian Contract Act, certain agreements are deemed void, meaning they are not legally binding and have no legal effect. These void agreements are outlined in various sections of the Act:

  1. Agreements with Unlawful Considerations and Objects (Section 24): Agreements are void if their considerations or objects are unlawful in part. If any part of the consideration or object of an agreement involves illegal or prohibited activities, the entire agreement becomes void.
  2. Agreements Without Consideration (Section 25): Agreements made without any consideration are void unless they fall within certain exceptions specified in the Act. Consideration is an essential element of a valid contract.
  3. Agreements in Restraint of Marriage (Section 26): Agreements that impose unreasonable restrictions on marriage are void. While some restrictions on marriage may be valid, agreements that entirely prevent a person from marrying or impose harsh conditions are void.
  4. Agreements in Restraint of Trade (Section 27): Agreements that unreasonably restrict a person's freedom to carry on a lawful profession, trade, or business are void. However, reasonable restrictions, such as non-compete clauses in employment contracts, are allowed.
  5. Agreements in Restraint of Legal Proceedings (Section 28): Agreements that hinder access to legal remedies or obstruct the enforcement of legal rights are void. Such agreements aim to prevent parties from seeking legal redress for disputes and are not enforceable.

Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act renders agreements made by way of wager void. It prohibits the filing of lawsuits to recover anything claimed to be won on a wager or entrusted to someone based on the outcome of an uncertain event involving a wager.

There is an exception to this rule regarding certain prizes in horse-racing. Section 30 does not make unlawful subscriptions, contributions, or agreements related to awards valued at ₹500 or more for the winners of horse-races.

It's important to note that Section 294A of the Indian Penal Code, which pertains to betting and gambling in connection with horse-racing, remains unaffected by the provisions of this section.

Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act outlines the criteria for individuals who are competent to enter into contracts. Competence to contract is determined by the following conditions:

  1. Age of Majority: The individual must have reached the age of majority as determined by the law applicable to them.
  2. Sound Mind: The person must be of sound mind, indicating that they are mentally capable of understanding the terms and consequences of the contract.
  3. Not Disqualified by Law: The individual must not be disqualified from entering into contracts by any relevant law that applies to them.

As per this section, the following categories of individuals are not considered competent to contract:

(a) Minors: Individuals who have not yet reached the age of majority, i.e., minors. (b) Persons of Unsound Mind: Individuals who are not of sound mind, meaning they lack the mental capacity to comprehend the contract. (c) Individuals Disqualified by Law: Individuals who are prohibited from entering into contracts by specific legal provisions.

Quasi Contracts: Quasi contracts are legal situations where one party is obligated to perform certain duties and the other party is entitled to specific rights, even in the absence of a formal contract. These situations are not actual contracts but are treated as such by the court for fairness and justice. Quasi contracts are based on the principle that one should not unjustly benefit from another's actions, even in the absence of an agreement.

Under the law, these quasi contracts fall into several categories:

  1. Section 68 - Claim for Necessaries Supplied to a Person Incapable of Contracting or on Their Behalf: This section addresses situations where a person, unable to enter into a contract, or someone legally responsible for them, receives necessary supplies from another individual. In such cases, the provider of the supplies has the right to seek reimbursement from the assets of the incapable person.

Example:

  • If person A provides necessary items suitable for the condition of person B, who is legally incapacitated (e.g., a lunatic), A has the right to be reimbursed from B's assets.

In quasi contracts, it is not an agreement or intention that defines the obligation; instead, it is a sense of duty, driven by principles of equity, conscience, justice, and fairness, that guides the legal recognition and enforcement of these obligations.

Quasi contracts encompass various legal situations where one party is obligated to perform certain duties, and the other party is entitled to specific rights, even in the absence of a formal contract. These quasi contracts are recognized by the court to uphold principles of fairness, equity, and justice, even in the absence of a prior agreement.

Know more: MP Judiciary Application Form

Under the law, these quasi contracts fall into several categories:

Section 68 - Reimbursement for Necessaries Supplied to an Incapacitated Person or on Their Behalf: This section addresses scenarios where a person, incapable of contracting, or someone legally responsible for them, receives necessary supplies from another individual. In such cases, the provider of the supplies has the right to seek reimbursement from the assets of the incapable person.

Examples:

  • If person A provides necessary items suitable for the condition of person B, who is legally incapacitated (e.g., a lunatic), A has the right to be reimbursed from B's assets.
  • Additionally, if A supplies the wife and children of B, who is a lunatic, with necessary items suited to their condition, A is entitled to reimbursement from B's property.

Section 69 - Reimbursement for Payment of Another Person's Debt with an Interest: This section pertains to situations where a person pays money that another is legally bound to pay, and the paying party has a vested interest in such payment. In these cases, the individual who made the payment is entitled to reimbursement by the person legally bound to pay.

Examples:

  • If person B, holding land in Bengal, is at risk of losing their lease due to unpaid revenue to the Government by A, the zamindar, B may pay the outstanding amount to prevent the sale and lease annulment. A, in this case, is obligated to reimburse B for the sum paid.

Section 70 - Compensation for Non-Gratuitous Acts: This section addresses scenarios where one person lawfully performs a service or delivers something to another person without intending to do so gratuitously. If the recipient benefits from this act, they are obliged to provide compensation to the person who performed the service or delivered the item.

Examples:

  • If person A, a tradesman, mistakenly leaves goods at B's house, and B considers them his own, B is obligated to pay A for the goods.

Section 71 - Responsibility of Finders of Goods: This section establishes that a person who finds goods belonging to another and takes them into their custody is held to the same responsibility as a bailee.

Section 72 - Liability for Money or Property Received by Mistake or Under Coercion: This section outlines that a person who receives money or property by mistake or under coercion must repay or return it.

Examples:

  • If A and B jointly owe 100 rupees to C, and A pays the full amount to C without B's knowledge, leading B to pay 100 rupees again to C, C is obligated to repay the redundant sum to B.
  • In another instance, if a railway company demands an illegal charge for carriage before releasing certain goods to the consignee, and the consignee pays this fee to obtain the goods, the consignee has the right to recover the excessive, illegally charged amount.

Contingent Contracts:

A contingent contract, as defined by Section 31, is an agreement to perform or refrain from an action based on the occurrence or non-occurrence of an event related to the contract. The key elements of a contingent contract include uncertainty and futurity of the event, with the event being collateral to the contract.

Agreements contingent on impossible event void Section 36 provides that contingent agreements to do or not to do anything, if an impossible event happens, are void, whether the impossibility of th event is known or not to the parties to the agreement at the time when it is made.

Example – (a) A agrees to pay B `1,000/- if two straight lines should enclose a space. This agreement is void. (b) A agrees to pay B `1,000/- if B will marry A’s daughter C. C, was dead at the time of the agreement. The agreement is void.

Termination of Contracts:

When a contract's rights and obligations cease to be in effect, the contract is considered discharged or terminated. In simpler terms, the discharge of a contract signifies the conclusion of the contractual relationship between the parties involved. Various methods or modes exist through which a contract can be discharged, effectively bringing it to an end.

Understand now: Judiciary Exam syllabus

Modes of Contract Discharge:

There are several methods or modes by which a contract can be discharged, signifying the end of the contractual relationship. These methods are as follows:

  1. Discharge by Performance: The contract is discharged when both parties fulfill their respective obligations as per the contract terms, leading to the successful completion of the contract.
  2. Discharge by Agreement: The contract can be discharged by mutual agreement between the parties, often through negotiation, where they reach a consensus to terminate the contract.
  3. Discharge by Lapse of Time: If the contract specifies a time frame for its performance, and that time elapses without fulfillment, the contract is discharged due to the passage of time.
  4. Discharge by Operation of Law: Certain legal events or circumstances may lead to the automatic termination of the contract as prescribed by law.
  5. Discharge by Impossibility of Performance: When it becomes impossible for one or both parties to fulfill their contractual obligations due to unforeseen circumstances or impossibility, the contract is discharged.
  6. Discharge by Breach of Contract: If one party fails to fulfill its contractual obligations, resulting in a breach of contract, the non-breaching party may choose to terminate the contract, thereby discharging it.

Contracts of Indemnity and Guarantee

Chapter VIII of the Act addresses the concepts of contracts of indemnity and guarantee. While Sections 124 and 125 pertain to contracts of indemnity, the remaining provisions deal with contracts of guarantee.

Contract of Indemnity

According to Section 124 of the Act, a 'contract of indemnity' is defined as an agreement in which one party promises to safeguard the other from any loss incurred due to the actions of the promisor themselves or the actions of any other individual.

Example: A enters into an agreement to indemnify B against any legal proceedings initiated by C concerning a certain sum of ₹2 lakhs. This constitutes a contract of indemnity.

This type of contract involves two key parties: the indemnifier and the indemnity holder. The indemnifier is the person offering the promise to indemnify against losses, while the indemnity holder is the person whose losses are being covered. Indemnify, in this context, doesn't solely mean reimbursement of monetary payments but also includes protection against losses associated with the liability for which indemnity is provided.

A contract of indemnity can be expressed through explicit terms or implied by the circumstances. For instance, in the case of 'Kuppan Chettiar v. Ramaswami Chettiar,' it was determined that there exists an implied contract by law in which the person requesting indemnification is obligated to keep the person with the duty indemnified against any resulting liability from the exercise of the supposed duty.

In the case of 'The New India Assurance Co. Limited v. State Trading Corporation of India,' it was noted that nearly all insurances, excluding life and personal accident insurances, can be considered contracts of indemnity.

Furthermore, in the case of 'National Overseas v. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Limited,' it was established that when an export risk policy is issued by the Export Credit Guarantee Corporation and the exporter voluntarily consigns shipments to the buyer at their own risk without adhering to the policy's terms, the corporation is not liable to indemnify the loss incurred by the exporter.

Get details: Judiciary preparation process

Rights of the Indemnity Holder When Sued

Section 125 outlines the rights of an indemnity holder when facing legal action. According to this section, a promise made in a contract of indemnity allows the indemnity holder, acting within their authorized scope, to recover the following from the promisor:

  • All damages they may be compelled to pay in a lawsuit related to the subject matter covered by the promise to indemnify.

Indemnity

The term 'indemnity' refers to protection against future loss. It involves a promise to compensate for losses in the form of money, goods, or other forms of loss. It serves as security or compensation against incurred losses.

According to Halsbury, indemnity encompasses both express and implied contracts designed to shield a person who has entered into or is about to enter into a contract or incur any other obligation from potential losses, irrespective of any default by a third party.

As per the Oxford Dictionary of Law, indemnity is an agreement where one person commits to pay another person a sum that is currently owed or may become owed by a third party. It is not dependent on the third party's failure to make payment.

Guarantee

Guarantee enables a person to obtain a loan or acquire goods on credit by offering surety or assuming responsibility. It is an agreement to take responsibility for another person's debt if they default on it.

The Oxford Dictionary of Law defines a guarantee as a secondary agreement in which a person (guarantor) becomes liable for a debt or default of another person (principal debtor), who is primarily responsible for the debt. A guarantor who fulfills their guarantee has the right to seek indemnification from the principal debtor.

Contract of Indemnity

Chapter VIII of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 contains legal provisions governing contracts of indemnity and guarantees in India.

Section 124: Contract of Indemnity

Section 124 of the Act defines a contract of indemnity as an agreement in which one party promises to protect the other party from losses caused either by the promisor's own actions or by the actions of any other person.

A contract of indemnity can offer protection against losses resulting from:

  1. The actions of the promisor.
  2. The actions of any other person.

Under Indian law, a contract of indemnity covers losses caused by human agency. In contrast, English law includes losses caused by the acts of the promisor or any other person, as well as other events like fires or accidents.

Indemnifier

The person making the promise to indemnify against losses or make good the losses (the promisor) is referred to as the indemnifier.

Indemnity-Holder

The person for whom the promise to indemnify is made (the promisee) is known as the indemnity-holder.

For example, if Anil enters into a contract with Swapnil to indemnify him against any legal proceedings initiated by Mrinal concerning a certain sum of Rs. 2000/-, Anil is the indemnifier, and Swapnil is the indemnity-holder.

Main Features

  • Involves two parties: the promisor (indemnifier) and the promisee (indemnity-holder).
  • The primary objective of a contract of indemnity is to provide protection against losses.
  • According to the Indian Contract Act, the contract of indemnity must aim to indemnify against losses resulting from the promisor's actions or the actions of any other person.
  • It is not contingent upon the default of a third party.

Understand this: Tips to prepare for an interview for the Civil Judge Examination

Rights of an Indemnity Holder

Section 125 of the Act outlines the 'Rights of an Indemnity Holder When Sued.' This section pertains to the rights of an indemnity holder to seek compensation and recover costs when they are compelled to pay in a legal suit. These rights are contingent upon the existence of a contract of indemnity. The rights of the indemnity holder include:

  1. Right to Recover Damages: The indemnity holder has the right to recover from the promisor the damages they were compelled to pay in any lawsuit related to the matter covered by the promise to indemnify.

  2. Right to Recover Costs: The indemnity holder can recover all the costs they were compelled to pay in a lawsuit, provided that:

    • They did not violate any of the promisor's orders when initiating or defending the suit.
    • They acted in a manner that a prudent person would have in the absence of the contract of indemnity, or the promisor authorized them to file or defend the suit.
  3. Right to Recover Compromise Amounts: The indemnity holder has the right to recover any sums they paid as part of a compromise in a lawsuit, provided that:

    • The compromise did not contravene the promisor's orders.
    • The compromise is one that the promisee would have made while acting prudently, even if the contract of indemnity did not exist, or the promisor had authorized the promisee to make the compromise.

Commencement of Liability

An important aspect of a contract of indemnity is determining when the liability to indemnify arises. Under English law, the traditional rule was that the indemnity holder could only recover if they had suffered actual losses, commonly known as "you must be damnified before you can claim to be indemnified." However, this rule evolved. In the case of Richardson Re, Ex parte the Governors of St. Thomas’s Hospital (1911), it was established that indemnity is not limited to repayment after payment; it also includes situations where the indemnity holder never has to make a payment. The Calcutta High Court, in Osman Jamal & Sons Ltd. v. Gopal Purshottam (1928), followed this principle.

Regarding the Indian position, the Bombay High Court in Gajanan Moreshwar v. Moreshwar Madan (1942) held that the equitable principle applied in England should also apply in India. Therefore, when the indemnity holder incurs absolute liability, they can call upon the indemnifier to discharge that liability and make the payment.

Contract of Guarantee

Section 126 of the Indian Contract Act defines the term 'contract of guarantee' and related terms. The purpose of a contract of guarantee is to provide additional security to a creditor by ensuring that the surety will pay the creditor if the debtor defaults.

Contract of Guarantee (Section 126): A contract of guarantee is an agreement to perform the promise or discharge the liability of a third person in case of their default.

This type of contract involves three parties:

  • Surety: The person providing the guarantee.
  • Principal Debtor: The person primarily responsible for the debt.
  • Creditor: The person to whom the guarantee is given.

For example, if Anil orders goods worth Rs. 2000/- from Swapnil on credit, and Mrinal guarantees to pay if Anil fails to do so, it constitutes a contract of guarantee. Here, Rs. 2000 is the principal debt, Anil is the principal debtor, Mrinal is the surety, and Swapnil is the creditor.

Key Features of a Contract of Guarantee

  1. Oral or Written: A contract of guarantee, as per Section 126, may be either oral or in writing. However, under English law, a written and signed document is typically required for a valid contract of guarantee.

  2. Existence of Principal Debt: A principal debt is essential for a contract of guarantee. Without a pre-existing obligation to pay, there is no basis for a promise or guarantee. If a promise is made to compensate for loss without an underlying principal debt, it becomes a contract of indemnity.

  3. Tripartite Nature: A contract of guarantee involves three parties, leading to three separate contracts:

  • The principal debtor commits to making payment to the creditor.
  • The surety undertakes to pay the creditor if the principal debtor defaults.
  • An implied promise by the principal debtor in favor of the surety to indemnify them in case they discharge the debtor's liability.
  1. Payment upon Default: In a contract of guarantee, the surety's promise to pay is contingent upon the debtor's default. The surety pays only when the debtor fails to do so.

  2. Consideration as Benefit to Debtor: Section 127 specifies that anything done or promised for the benefit of the principal debtor can serve as sufficient consideration for the surety providing the guarantee. For instance, if Anil refrains from suing Swapnil for a year, benefiting Swapnil (the debtor), Mrinal (the surety) may provide a guarantee as sufficient consideration.

  3. Consent without Misrepresentation or Concealment: Section 142 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 states that a guarantee obtained through misrepresentation by the creditor or with their knowledge or consent regarding a material aspect of the transaction is invalid. Section 143 also invalidates a guarantee obtained by the creditor if they keep silent about a material circumstance.

These features characterize a contract of guarantee, which is a legally binding agreement designed to ensure the fulfillment of a debtor's obligations through the involvement of a surety and creditor.

Difference between contract of indemnity and contract of guarantee   

BASIS OF DISTINCTION CONTRACT OF INDEMNITY CONTRACT OF GUARANTEE
Parties  There are two parties in a contract of indemnity, namely the indemnifier and the indemnity holder. There are three parties in a contract of guarantee, namely the principal debtor, the creditor, and the surety. 
No. of contracts It consists of only one contract between the indemnifier and the indemnity holder. The indemnifier promises to indemnify the indemnified/indemnity holder in event of a certain loss. It consists of three contracts-A contract between principal debtor and creditor wherein the debtor promises to perform his obligation/make payment. The contract between surety and creditor wherein the surety promises to perform the aforesaid obligation/make the payment if the principal debtor makes a default. An implied contract between the surety and the principal debtor. The principal debtor bounds himself to indemnify the surety for the sum that he has paid under the guarantee undertaken by him.
3. Nature of liability The liability of the indemnifier is primary. The liability in a contract of indemnity is contingent in the sense that it may or may not arise. The liability of the surety is a secondary one, i.e., his obligation to pay arises only when the principal debtor defaults. Liability in a contract of guarantee is continuing in the sense that once the guarantee has been acted upon, the liability of the surety automatically arises. However, the said liability remains in suspended animation until the debtor makes default.
Default of third person The liability of an indemnifier is not conditional on the default of somebody else. For example, Mrinal promises the shopkeeper to pay, by telling him that, “Let Anil have the goods, I will be your paymaster”. This is a contract of indemnity as the promise to pay by Mrinal is not conditional on default by Anil. Liability of surety is conditional on the default of the principal debtor. For example, Ajit buys goods from a seller and Mrinal tells the seller that if Ajit doesn’t pay you, I will. This is a contract of guarantee. Thus, the liability of Mrinal is conditional on non-payment by Ajit.
Principal debt No requirement of the principal debt. Principal debt is necessary. (refer to the previous example)
Whether subsequent recovery is possible Once the indemnifier indemnifies the indemnity holder, he cannot recover that amount from anybody else. After the surety has made the payment, he steps into the shoes of the creditor and can recover the sums paid by him from the principal debtor.
Whether a contract has to be in writing or can be oral as well  In India, contracts of indemnity may be either oral or written.  In India, a contract of guarantee may be either oral or written. 

Continuing Guarantee

Section 129 of the Act defines a "continuing guarantee" as a guarantee that extends to a series of transactions. Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

  • A promises B to be responsible for the due collection and payment of rents by C for B's zamindari, up to the amount of `5,000. This guarantee is considered a continuing guarantee.
  • A guarantees payment to B, a tea dealer, up to $100 for any tea supplied by B to C over time. B initially supplies tea worth $100, which C pays for. Later, B supplies tea worth $200, and C fails to pay. A's guarantee in this case is a continuing guarantee, and A is liable for the initial $100.
  • A guarantees the price of five sacks of flour to be delivered by B to C, to be paid for in a month. After the delivery and payment for five sacks, B delivers four more sacks, which C doesn't pay for. A's guarantee in this case is not continuing, and he is not liable for the price of the additional four sacks.

A continuing guarantee can either be specific, limited to a particular debtor or liability amount, or it can extend to a series of transactions, making it continuing in nature.

Revocation of Continuing Guarantee

A continuing guarantee can be revoked by the surety in two ways:

  1. Revocation by Surety: Section 130 of the Act allows the surety to revoke a continuing guarantee as to future transactions by providing notice to the creditor. For example, if A has provided a continuing guarantee for 12 months but wishes to revoke it after three months, A can do so, discharging themselves from liability for future transactions. However, A would still be liable for any transactions that occurred before the revocation.
  2. Revocation upon the Death of Surety: Section 131 states that in the absence of any contrary agreement, the death of the surety operates as a revocation of a continuing guarantee, but only with regard to future transactions. This means that if the surety passes away, their liability under the continuing guarantee ceases for transactions occurring after their death.

These provisions govern the revocation of continuing guarantees, ensuring that the surety has the ability to limit their future liability under such guarantees.

Section 140: Subrogation and Conditions for Surety's Rights

Section 140 of the Indian Contract Act deals with the concept of subrogation and outlines the conditions under which a surety can be invested with the rights of the creditor against the principal debtor. Subrogation occurs when the guarantor clears their liability by making a payment, and as a result, they are entitled to step into the shoes of the creditor regarding their rights. To achieve this, the following conditions must be fulfilled:

  1. The guaranteed debt must have become due, or the principal debtor must have defaulted in performing the guaranteed duty.

  2. The surety must have paid the entire debt or performed all that they are liable for.

Only when both of these conditions are met can the surety call upon the creditor to invest them with all the rights that the creditor had against the principal debtor.

Invalid Guarantee

Certain guarantees are considered invalid under the Indian Contract Act. These include:

  1. Guarantee Obtained by Misrepresentation (Section 142): Any guarantee obtained through misrepresentation made by the creditor, or with the creditor's knowledge and consent, concerning a material aspect of the transaction is invalid.

  2. Guarantee Obtained by Concealment (Section 143): Any guarantee obtained by the creditor by keeping silent about material circumstances is also invalid.

Know More: career as a civil judge

Examples of Invalid Guarantees:

  • A hires B as a clerk to collect money, and B fails to account for some of the receipts. A asks B to provide security for proper accounting, and C gives a guarantee for B's accounting. However, A does not inform C about B's previous misconduct. When B later defaults, the guarantee is invalid.

  • A guarantees payment to C for iron to be supplied to B, to the amount of 2000 tons. B and C privately agree that B will pay an extra `5/- per ton, which will go towards an old debt. This agreement is concealed from A. A is not liable as a surety.

Co-surety (Section 144):

Section 144 deals with co-sureties, where two or more individuals act as sureties for the same debt or duty, either jointly or separately, and under the same or different contracts, with or without each other's knowledge. In the absence of any specific agreement to the contrary, co-sureties are liable to pay equally among themselves. This means that each co-surety is responsible for an equal share of the entire debt, or that part of it which remains unpaid by the principal debtor.

Examples of Co-surety Liability:

  • A, B, and C act as sureties for D under three separate bonds, each with a different penalty. D makes a default of 30,000 rupees. As co-sureties, A, B, and C are each liable to pay 10,000 rupees, contributing equally.

Implied Promise to Indemnify the Surety

Section 145 of the Indian Contract Act addresses the concept of an implied promise within every contract of guarantee. In such contracts, there exists an inherent promise by the principal debtor to indemnify the surety. This means that the principal debtor implicitly commits to reimbursing the surety for any sums that the surety rightfully pays under the guarantee. However, the principal debtor is not responsible for repaying any sums that the surety pays wrongfully.

Example:

Let's consider an example to illustrate this concept:

  • B owes a debt to C, and A acts as the surety for this debt. When C demands payment from A, and A refuses to pay, C takes legal action against A for the amount owed. A decides to defend the lawsuit, as he has valid reasons for doing so. However, due to legal proceedings, A is eventually compelled to pay the entire debt along with the associated costs.

In this scenario, A is entitled to recover from B not only the principal debt but also the amount he paid for the legal costs. This is because the implied promise by the principal debtor (B) to indemnify the surety (A) allows A to seek reimbursement for sums paid rightfully under the guarantee, which includes the costs incurred during the legal defense.

Bailment and Pledge

Chapter IX of the Act is dedicated to the legal concepts of bailment and pledge.

Bailment Section 148 provides the definition of 'bailment' as the act of delivering goods from one person to another for a specific purpose, under a contract that dictates they must be returned or dealt with according to the directions of the person making the delivery. Bailment involves two key parties:

  • Bailor: The person delivering the goods, known as the 'bailor.'
  • Bailee: The recipient of the goods, known as the 'bailee.'

It's worth noting that when a person already has possession of someone else's goods and agrees to hold them as a bailee, the owner becomes the bailor, and the possessor becomes the bailee. This transformation into a bailment occurs even if the goods were not initially delivered for that specific purpose.

For a situation to qualify as a bailment, several conditions must be met:

  • There must be a specific delivery of goods from one person to another.
  • The delivery must be made for a particular purpose.
  • The delivery must be subject to a contract specifying that the goods will be returned or dealt with according to the bailor's instructions.

Bailments can be categorized as either voluntary or involuntary. Voluntary bailments arise from an explicit agreement between the parties. In contrast, involuntary bailments occur in cases involving found goods, goods sent to the wrong location, an excess of ordered goods, or situations where the bailee passes away, and the subject of the bailment ends up with the bailee's heirs.

If there is no obligation to return the identical article, whether in its original form or altered, a bailment contract does not exist.

Pledge Section 172 of the Indian Contract Act deals with the concept of pledge. A pledge is a special kind of bailment in which goods are delivered to the bailee (pledgee) as security for a debt or performance of a promise. The essential elements of a pledge include:

  • The delivery of goods for the purpose of creating security.
  • The existence of a debt or promise.
  • The understanding that upon fulfillment of the debt or promise, the goods will be returned to the pledgor.

In a pledge, the pledgor retains ownership of the goods while the pledgee holds possession of them as security. If the pledgor fails to meet their obligation, the pledgee has the right to sell the goods to recover the debt or enforce the promise.

Get Details: note-making tips suggested by the judiciary exam toppers 

Delivery to Bailee: How It Occurs

Section 149 outlines that the delivery to the bailee can be achieved by any action that results in the goods coming under the possession of the intended bailee or any individuals authorized to hold the goods on behalf of the bailee.

Duties of the Bailor

Section 150 specifies three duties of the bailor as follows:

  • The bailor is obligated to disclose to the bailee any faults in the goods that the bailor is aware of and that significantly affect their use or expose the bailee to unusual risks.
  • In cases where the bailor fails to make such disclosures and this omission results in loss or damage, the bailor is responsible for the portion of the loss or damage that directly results from these faults.
  • If the goods are bailed in exchange for payment, the bailor is responsible for any damage directly arising from these faults, whether or not the bailor was aware of their existence in the goods being bailed.

Responsibilities of the Bailee

Section 151 stipulates that in all instances of bailment, the bailee is obligated to exercise the same level of care for the bailed goods as a reasonable person would for their own goods of comparable volume, quality, and value under similar circumstances.

In the case of 'Nagalinga Chettiyar V. Kayarebana Chettiyar' – AIR 1915 Mad.80, it was established that failing to meet the standard of care outlined in Section 151 does not absolve the bailee from liability, even if the bailee's own goods were lost concurrently with the bailed goods.

In 'Sirmour Truck Operators Union V. National Insurance Co. Limited' – AIR 2011 (NOC) 389 (HP), it was ruled that a carrier cannot escape liability for losses resulting from their own negligence or negligence by their agent when goods are transported under the 'owner’s risk' condition.

Exemption from Liability for Bailee

Section 152 states that, in the absence of a specific agreement, the bailee is not responsible for the loss, destruction, or deterioration of the bailed item if the bailee has exercised the level of care described in Section 151.

Termination of Bailment

Section 153 provides that a bailment contract can be voided at the discretion of the bailor if the bailee performs any action regarding the bailed goods that contradicts the terms of the bailment.

Responsibility for Unapproved Use of Bailed Goods

As per Section 154, if the bailee employs the bailed goods in a manner inconsistent with the terms of the bailment, the bailee is accountable for reimbursing the bailor for any harm incurred by the goods as a result of such utilization.

Bailee's Responsibility for Delayed Return and Accrued Benefits

Section 161 stipulates that if, due to the bailee's default, the goods are not returned, delivered, or tendered in a timely manner, the bailee becomes liable to the bailor for any loss, destruction, or deterioration of the goods from that point onward.

Section 163 outlines that unless there is a contractual agreement to the contrary, the bailee is obligated to hand over to the bailor, or in accordance with the bailor's instructions, any gains or profits that may have arisen from the bailed goods during the bailment period.

Delivery to One Joint Owner and Bailment without Title

Section 165 stipulates that when several joint owners of goods enter into a bailment agreement, the bailee is allowed to return the goods to, or in accordance with the instructions of, a single joint owner without requiring the consent of all owners unless there is an explicit agreement stating otherwise.

Section 166 establishes that if the bailor lacks legal title to the goods, and the bailee, in good faith, returns them to the bailor or as per the bailor's directions, the bailee is not liable to the true owner for such delivery.

Termination of Gratuitous Bailment due to Death and Third-Party Rights

Section 162 specifies that a gratuitous bailment comes to an end upon the death of either the bailor or the bailee.

Section 167 grants the right to a third party, aside from the bailor, who claims ownership of the bailed goods, to apply to the Court to prevent the delivery of the goods to the bailor and resolve the dispute regarding the title to the goods.

Rights and Responsibilities of Finder of Goods

Section 168 clarifies that a person who finds goods has no legal right to sue the owner for compensation related to expenses and efforts voluntarily incurred to preserve the goods and locate the owner. However, the finder may retain the goods until receiving such compensation. Additionally, if the owner has offered a specific reward for the return of the lost goods, the finder has the right to sue for that reward and can hold onto the goods until receiving it.

Sale of Lost Goods by the Finder

Section 169 outlines the circumstances under which a finder of goods may sell them. If the owner cannot be reasonably found or refuses to pay the lawful charges of the finder upon demand, the finder can sell the goods under the following conditions:

  1. When the goods are in danger of perishing or losing a significant portion of their value.
  2. When the lawful charges of the finder for the found goods amount to two-thirds of their value.

The sale can be conducted by the owner, an agent with the owner's consent, or someone with the authority to do so. The finder of the assets can also sell them and pass good title, and there may be a sale by estoppel.

Bailee's Right to Lien

Section 170 states that when a bailee has provided a service involving labor or skill to the goods bailed, in accordance with the purpose of the bailment, they have the right to retain those goods until they receive proper remuneration for the services rendered. This right exists unless there is a contract specifying otherwise.

Pledge and its Definition

Section 172 defines 'pledge' as the bailment of movable property as security for the payment of a debt or the performance of a promise. This arrangement involves two parties:

  • 'Pawner': The person delivering the property as security is referred to as the pawner.
  • 'Pawnee': The person receiving the property as security is known as the pawnee.

Pledge is a specific form of bailment used for securing debt or fulfilling a promise. It involves the possession of movable property being transferred to the pawnee as security. This concept is elaborated upon in Sections 172 to 179 of the Act. In a pledge, the pawnee possesses and has a special property interest in the goods, which can be retained to ensure repayment. Unlike a mortgage, a pledge does not transfer any ownership interest in the property to the pawnee, and the delivery of the goods is essential to complete the pledge.

Rights of the Pawnee

The rights of the pawnee are elaborated in Section 173, 175, and 176. According to Section 173, the pawnee has the authority to retain the goods pledged, not solely for the repayment of the debt or the fulfillment of the promise, but also for the interest on the debt and all essential expenses incurred for the possession and preservation of the pledged goods.

Section 175 stipulates that the pawnee is entitled to receive from the pawnor any extraordinary expenses incurred for preserving the pledged goods.

Section 176 details the actions a pawnee can take if the pawnor defaults in repaying the debt or fulfilling the promise. The pawnee can initiate legal action against the pawnor for the debt or promise and retain the pledged goods as collateral security. Alternatively, the pawnee may sell the pledged items, providing the pawnor with reasonable notice of the sale. If the proceeds from the sale are less than the amount due for the debt or promise, the pawnor remains liable for the balance. Conversely, if the sale generates more than the debt or promise amount, the pawnee must refund the surplus to the pawnor.

Retaining Goods by the Pawnee

Section 174 emphasizes that, unless there is a specific contract stating otherwise, the pawnee cannot retain the pledged goods for any debt or promise other than the one for which they were pledged. However, such a contract is presumed to be in place concerning subsequent advances made by the pawnee unless stated otherwise.

Download now: Judiciary Examination Question Papers 

Pledge by Mercantile Agent

Section 178 deals with pledges made by a mercantile agent who, with the owner's consent, is in possession of goods or their title documents. In such cases, any pledge made by the agent while acting in the ordinary course of mercantile business is considered valid, as if explicitly authorized by the owner of the goods. This is valid provided that the pawnee acts in good faith and is unaware at the time of pledging that the pawnor lacks the authority to pledge.

A 'mercantile agent' is defined under Section 2(2) of the Sale of Goods Act as an agent authorized, in the course of ordinary business, to sell goods, consign goods for sale, buy goods, or raise money with goods as security.

Pledge in a Voidable Contract

Section 178A specifies that when the pawnor has possession of the goods pledged under a contract that is voidable under Section 19 or Section 19A, and the contract has not been rescinded at the time of pledging, the pawnee acquires a valid title to the goods. This is contingent upon the pawnee acting in good faith and without knowledge of any defects in the pawnor's title.

Limited Interest of the Pawnor

Section 179 explains that when an individual pledges goods in which they possess only a limited interest, the pledge is valid only to the extent of that limited interest.

Suit Against Wrongdoers

Section 180 outlines the rights of the bailee if a third party wrongfully interferes with the possession or use of the goods bailed or causes harm to them. In such cases, the bailee can seek remedies that the owner might have pursued if no bailment had been established. Either the bailor or the bailee can file a lawsuit against the third party for such interference or damage.

Apportionment of Relief

Section 181 states that any relief or compensation obtained in such a lawsuit must be distributed according to the respective interests of the bailor and bailee.

Agency: Chapter X of the Act is dedicated to the subject of Agency.

Definition of Agent Section 182 of the Act establishes that an 'agent' is an individual employed to perform tasks on behalf of another or to represent another person in transactions with third parties.

Principal The person for whom these actions are performed or who is being represented is referred to as the 'principal.'

Agent Eligibility Certain provisions regarding agents are as follows:

  • An individual may serve as an agent if they have reached the age of majority according to the relevant law.
  • They must be of sound mind.
  • The appointment of an agent does not require any consideration.
  • An agent's authority can be either expressed or implied.

Definition of Expressed and Implied Authority Section 187 outlines the definitions of 'expressed authority' and 'implied authority.' Expressed authority is granted through spoken or written words, while implied authority is inferred from the circumstances surrounding the case. These circumstances can include spoken or written communications and customary business practices.

Example For instance, if A owns a shop in Serampur but resides in Calcutta and occasionally visits the shop, and the shop is managed by B, who frequently orders goods from C in A's name for the shop's purposes and pays for them using A's funds, B has implied authority from A to make these orders in A's name for the shop.

Agent's Eligibility Section 184 states that, for matters related to the principal and third parties, any person may become an agent. However, individuals who have not reached the age of majority and those lacking mental capacity cannot become agents and assume responsibilities according to the law.

Consideration for Agency Section 185 clarifies that no consideration is required to establish an agency relationship.

Authority of the Agent Section 188 defines the extent of an agent's authority. If an agent is authorized to perform an action, they also have the authority to carry out any lawful activities necessary to accomplish that action. Similarly, an agent with authority to conduct a business has the authority to perform all lawful tasks required for that business's operation, as well as those typically performed in the course of running such a business.

Agent's Authority and Sub-Agents

Section 190 addresses the agent's authority to delegate responsibilities. An agent cannot legally appoint another person to perform tasks that the agent has explicitly or implicitly agreed to carry out personally, unless it is customary in a particular trade for a sub-agent to be engaged, or the nature of the agency necessitates the use of a sub-agent.

Definition of Sub-Agent Section 191 defines a 'sub-agent' as an individual employed by and acting under the supervision of the original agent within the scope of the agency's business.

Role of the Sub-Agent Section 192 establishes that when a sub-agent is properly appointed, the principal, in relation to third parties, is represented by the sub-agent. The principal is bound by and accountable for the sub-agent's actions as if the sub-agent were initially appointed by the principal.

The agent is responsible to the principal for the actions of the sub-agent. The sub-agent is accountable to the agent but not to the principal, except in cases involving fraud or deliberate wrongdoing.

Agent's Responsibility for Unauthorized Sub-Agents Section 193 outlines the agent's liability when they appoint a sub-agent without proper authorization. If an agent, without the necessary authority, appoints a person to act as a sub-agent, the agent assumes a role similar to that of a principal with respect to the person they employed as a sub-agent. The agent is responsible for the actions of this individual both to the principal and to third parties. The principal is not represented by, or responsible for, the actions of the improperly appointed sub-agent, and the sub-agent is not liable to the principal.

Authority to Name Another Person Section 194 specifies that when an agent, who possesses express or implied authority to designate another person to act on behalf of the principal in the agency's business, appoints such an individual, that person is not considered a sub-agent. Instead, they become an agent of the principal for the part of the agency's business entrusted to them.

Duties of an Agent

Section 195 outlines the duties of an agent in selecting another individual to act on behalf of their principal. An agent is obligated to exercise the same level of prudence and discretion that a reasonable person would employ in their own affairs when choosing an agent for their principal. If the agent fulfills this duty, they are not held accountable to the principal for the actions or negligence of the agent they have selected.

Examples: (a) Suppose A instructs B, a merchant, to purchase a ship on A's behalf. B, in turn, hires a reputable ship surveyor to make the ship selection for A. However, the surveyor's choice proves to be negligent, resulting in the selection of an unseaworthy ship that is subsequently lost. In this case, B is not liable to A for the choice of the ship, but the surveyor is responsible for the consequences.

(b) Consider a situation where A consigns goods to B, a merchant, for the purpose of selling them. B then engages a reputable auctioneer to sell A's goods and allows the auctioneer to collect the sale proceeds. However, the auctioneer later becomes insolvent without accounting for the proceeds. In this scenario, B is not held responsible to A for the missing proceeds.

Ratification Section 196 addresses the rights of a person concerning acts performed on their behalf without their knowledge or authorization. When actions are carried out by one person on behalf of another, but without the latter's awareness or consent, the person for whom the acts were performed has the option to either ratify or disavow those actions. If they choose to ratify them, the same legal consequences will ensue as if the acts had been executed with their explicit authority.

Read aboutMP Civil Judge Examination Preparation

Termination of Agency

Section 201 outlines the circumstances under which an agency can be terminated. An agency may be terminated by the principal in the following ways:

  • By revoking the agent's authority.
  • By the agent renouncing their role in the agency.
  • When the business or purpose for which the agency was established is completed.
  • In the event of the death or unsoundness of mind of either the principal or the agent.
  • When the principal is declared insolvent under the provisions of any applicable law for dealing with insolvent debtors.

Protection of Agent's Interest

Section 202 provides protection for the agent's interest in cases where the agent has a personal stake or interest in the property that is the subject of the agency. In such situations, the agency cannot be terminated to the detriment of the agent's interest, unless there is an explicit contract stating otherwise.

Compensation

Section 205 deals with compensation in cases of revocation by the principal or renunciation by the agent. When there is an explicit or implicit agreement that the agency will continue for a specified period, the principal must compensate the agent or vice versa if the agency is revoked or renounced without sufficient cause.

Notice of Revocation

Section 206 stipulates that reasonable notice must be provided before revocation or renunciation of the agency. Failure to provide such notice may result in the responsible party compensating the other party for any resulting damage.

Express or Implied Revocation/Renunciation

Section 207 clarifies that revocation or renunciation can be either explicitly stated or implied through the conduct of the principal or agent, respectively.

Termination of Sub-agent's Authority

Section 210 states that the termination of the authority of an agent also leads to the termination of the authority of all sub-agents appointed by that agent.

Agent's Duty

Section 211 outlines the obligations of an agent. An agent is obligated to conduct the business of the principal in accordance with the principal's instructions. In the absence of specific instructions, the agent must follow the customary practices for similar businesses in the locality where the agent conducts business on behalf of the principal. Any deviation from these guidelines that results in losses must be compensated by the agent to the principal, and any profits generated must be accounted for and surrendered to the principal.

Rights of the Principal

The rights of the principal are delineated in Sections 215 and 216.

  • Section 215 stipulates that if an agent conducts business on their own behalf within the scope of the agency without obtaining prior consent from the principal and without disclosing all relevant information that they are aware of regarding the matter, the principal has the option to disavow the transaction. This is applicable in cases where it becomes evident that either essential facts were deliberately withheld from the principal by the agent or the agent's actions have proven detrimental to the principal.
  • Section 216 states that if an agent, without informing their principal, engages in business related to the agency for their own benefit rather than on behalf of the principal, the principal has the right to demand from the agent any gains or advantages that may have accrued to the agent through that transaction.

Rights of the Agent

The rights of agents are defined in Sections 217 and 219.

  • Section 217: An agent has the right to retain, from any sums received on behalf of the principal in the course of agency business, all monies owed to the agent for advances made or legitimate expenses incurred during the conduct of such business. The agent is also entitled to the remuneration due for acting as an agent.
  • Section 218: After deducting the aforementioned amounts, the agent is obligated to remit to the principal all sums received on the principal's behalf.
  • Section 219: Unless specified otherwise in a contract, payment for the execution of any act is not owed to the agent until the completion of that act. However, an agent can withhold funds received on account of goods sold, even if not all the consigned goods have been sold or if the sale is not yet finalized.

Misconduct of the Agent

Section 220 states that an agent who engages in misconduct during the agency's operations is not entitled to any remuneration for the part of the business affected by such misconduct.

Read More: English preparation for Judiciary Exams.

Agent’s Right of Retention

Section 221 establishes that unless there is a specific contract stating otherwise, an agent has the right to withhold goods, documents, and any other property, whether movable or immovable, received from the principal until the agent's outstanding dues for commission, expenses, and services related to these items have been settled or accounted for.

Principal's Responsibility to the Agent

According to Section 222, the principal who employs an agent is obligated to indemnify the agent against any legal consequences arising from the agent's lawful actions carried out within the scope of the authority granted by the principal.

Agency with Third Parties

Section 226 addresses the enforcement and consequences of contracts made through agents. Contracts entered into via an agent and obligations resulting from actions performed by an agent can be enforced in the same manner and have the same legal implications as if these contracts were made and actions were taken by the principal in person.

Examples: (a) If A purchases goods from B, knowing that B is an agent for selling them but unaware of the principal's identity, the principal is entitled to demand the price of the goods from A. A cannot use a debt owed to him by B as a setoff in a lawsuit brought by the principal. (b) When A, acting as B's agent with the authority to collect money on B's behalf, receives a sum of money from C that is owed to B, C is relieved of the obligation to pay that sum to B.

Section 227 stipulates that when an agent exceeds their authorized powers, and it is possible to separate the actions within their authority from those beyond their authority, only the part of their actions within their authority is binding in the relationship between the agent and the principal.

Notice to the Agent

Section 229 specifies that any notice given to or information acquired by the agent, as long as it is provided or obtained during the course of the business conducted by the agent on behalf of the principal, shall, in the relationship between the principal and third parties, carry the same legal implications as if it had been given to or acquired by the principal directly.

Enforcement of Contracts by Agent on Behalf of Principal

Section 230 stipulates that unless there is an explicit contract stating otherwise, an agent cannot personally pursue the enforcement of contracts that he has entered into on behalf of his principal, nor is he personally obligated by them. However, such a contract implying personal responsibility for the agent will be assumed in the following situations:

  1. When the contract is made by an agent for the sale or purchase of goods on behalf of a merchant residing in another country.
  2. When the agent refrains from disclosing the name of his principal.
  3. When the principal, even if disclosed, cannot be subject to a lawsuit.

Rights of Parties in Contracts Made by Undisclosed Agents

Section 231 outlines the rights of parties involved in a contract made by an undisclosed agent. If an agent enters into a contract with a person who is unaware, and has no reason to suspect, that the agent is acting on behalf of a principal, the principal can demand the fulfillment of the contract. However, the other party to the contract retains the same rights against the principal as they would have had against the agent if the agent had been the principal.

If the principal reveals their identity before the contract is finalized, the other contracting party can refuse to fulfill the contract if they can demonstrate that had they known the true identity of the principal or that the agent was not the principal, they would not have entered into the contract.

Section 232 further specifies that when one person contracts with another, both parties being unaware, and having no reasonable grounds to suspect, that the other is acting as an agent, the principal can only enforce the contract subject to the rights and obligations that exist between the agent and the other party to the contract.

Liability of a Falsely Represented Agent

Section 235 addresses the liability of an individual who falsely represents themselves as the authorized agent of another, leading a third party to engage with them under this false pretense. If the alleged employer (the true principal) does not later confirm or ratify these actions, the person who pretended to be the agent is responsible for compensating the third party for any losses or damages incurred as a result of the dealings based on this misrepresentation.

Section 236 specifies that an individual who enters into a contract while assuming the role of an agent cannot demand the contract's performance if, in reality, they were not acting as an agent but on their own behalf.

Section 237 states that when an agent, without proper authorization, carries out actions or enters into obligations with third parties on behalf of their principal, the principal becomes legally bound by these actions or obligations if, through their words or behavior, they have led these third parties to believe that such actions and obligations were within the scope of the agent's authority.

Prepare with: Best judiciary online coaching.

Questions for practice of Indian Contract Act for Judiciary Preparation

1. Which one of the following is not a quasi contract?

(a) Claim for necessaries supplied to person incapable of contracting, or on his account;

(b) Reimbursement of persons paying money by another, in payment of which he is interested;

(c) Uncertainty and futurity of the event to which it is related;

(d) Responsibility of finder of goods.

2. The breach of contract may be-

(a) Actual;

(b) Anticipatory;

(c) None of the above;

(d) Either of the above

3. Which one of the following is not the feature of the contract of guarantee?

(a) There are two parties in this contract;

(b) The liability of surety is secondary;

(c) There is an existing debt for which the surety gives guarantee to the creditor on behalf of the principal debtor;

(d) The surety gives contract at the request of the principal debtor

4. A person may not become an agent-

(a) If he is of the age of maturity;

(b) If he is of unsound mind;

(c) Either of the above;

(d) None of the above.

5. Which one of the following is not a contract?

(a) A find B’s purse and gives it to him. B promises to give him `1,000/-;

(b) A promises, for no consideration, to give `10,000/-;

(c) A agrees to sell a horse worth of `1,000/- for `10/-;

(d) A supports B’s infant son. B promises to pay A’s expenses in so doing.

6. Which one of the following is not a lawful object?

(a) A promises to obtain for B an employment in the public service and B promises to pay ` 2 lakhs to A;

(b) A agrees to sell his house to B for `25 lakhs for which B agrees;

(c) A promises to maintain B’s child and B promises to pay `5,000/- per month;

(d) A promises to pay `1 lakh at the end of six months if C who owes that sum to B fails to pay. B promises to grant time to C accordingly.

Conclusion:

The Indian Contract Act, 1872, forms the basis for contract law in India, and its provisions continue to be applied in various business and personal transactions. A Judiciary aspirant should make their own notes and for that you can refer to the notes on this blog.

  1. refer to all the important sections  mentioned in this article.
  2. Make your own notes after reading this article thoroughly.
  3. Make sure you read properly from the Bare Acts as well to get complete knowledge about the Indian Contrat Act.
  4. For judiciary preparation refer to the Previous Year Papers to know the trends.
  5. You must practice all the previous year papers for Prelims and Mains both to test your complete knowledge.

All the best Judiciary Aspirants.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which are the best books for the preparation of Indian Contract Act?

Is bare Acts knowledge enough for Judicial Services Exams?

Can I Prepare for Indian Contract Act in 3 months?

What are the important bare acts for judiciary exams?

How are Previous year question papers useful in preparing for the Indian Contract Act?

Indian Contract Act Notes for Judiciary Exam Preparation Tips

Author : Yogricha

June 6, 2024

SHARE

Overview: The Indian Contract Act, 1872 was enacted during British colonial rule and continues to be the primary source of contract law in the country.

The act defines the legal framework for entering into and enforcing contracts in India. Indian Contract Act is asked in all State Judiciary Exams and therefore if you are a Judiciary Aspirant you must ensure that you prepare Indian Contract Act in entirety while focusing on the Important sections. In this article we have given you a list of all the sections that are important for your preparation.

Also we have curated notes for your preparation of Contact act for Judiciary, Law exams and Law School exams.

In this article we will cover:

  1. Important sections of Indian Contract Act for Judiciary
  2. Tips on how to prepare Indian Contract Act
  3. Notes for your preparation.
  4. Downloadable notes on Indian Contract Act
  5. Questions for practice
  6. Download other Study Material for your preparation

Download Study Material For Judiciary Exams by Judiciary Gold

Know more: Everything About Judiciary Exams

Important Sections under Indian Contract Act

Here are the most important sections of ICA for Judiciary Exams:

  • Section 2: Interpretation-clause.
  • Section 3: Communication, acceptance and revocation of proposals.
  • Section 4: Communication when complete.
  • Section 5: Revocation of Proposals and acceptance.
  • Section 6: Revocation how made.
  • Section 10: What agreements are contracts?
  • Section 11: Who are competent to contract?
  • Section 12: What is a sound mind for the purposes of contracting?
  • Section 13: “Consent” defined.
  • Section 14: “Free consent” defined.
  • Section 15: “Coercion” defined.
  • Section 16: “Undue influence” defined.
  • Section 17: “Fraud” defined.
  • Section 18: “Misrepresentation” defined.
  • Section 20: Agreement void where both parties are under mistake as to matter of fact.
  • Section 21: Effect of mistake as to law.
  • Section 22: Contract caused by mistake of one party as to matter of fact.
  • Section 23: What consideration and objects are lawful, and whatnot.
  • Section 24: Agreements void, if consideration are objects unlawful in part.
  • Section 25: Agreement without consideration, void, unless it is in writing and registered or is a promise to compensate for something done or is a promise to pay a debt barred by limitation law.
  • Section 26: Agreement in restraint of marriage, void.
  • Section 27: Agreement in restraint of trade, void.
  • Section 28: Agreements in restrain of legal proceedings, void.
  • Section 29: Agreements void for uncertainty.
  • Section 30: Agreements by way of wager, void.
  • Section 31: “Contingent contract” defined
  • Section 36: Agreement contingent on impossible events void
  • Section 38: Effect of refusal to accept offer of performance
  • Section 43: Any one of joint promisors may be compelled to perform
  • Section 55: Effect of failure to perform at fixed time, in contract in which time is essential
  • Section 56: Agreement to do impossible act.
  • Section 62: Effect of novation, rescission, and alteration of contract.
  • Section 63: Promisee may dispense with or remit performance of promisee
  • Section 62: Effect of novation, rescission, and alteration of contract.
  • Section 68: Claim for necessaries supplied to person incapable of contracting, or on his account
  • Section 69: Reimbursement of person paying money due by another, in payment of which he is interested
  • Section 70: Obligation of person enjoying benefit of non-gratuitous act
  • Section 71: Responsibility of finder of good
  • Section 73: Compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract
  • Section 74: Compensation for breach of contract where penalty stipulated for
  • Section 75: Party rightfully rescinding contract, entitled to compensation
  • Section 124: “Contract of indemnity” defined.
  • Section 125: Right of indemnity-holder when sued.
  • Section 126: “Contract of guarantee”, “surety”, “principal debtor” and “creditor”.
  • Section 129: Continuing guarantee.
  • Section 134: Discharge of surety by release or discharge of principal debtor.
  • Section 135: Discharge of surety when creditor compounds with, gives time to, or agrees not to sue, principal debtor.
  • Section 138: Release of one co-surety does not discharge other.
  • Section 139: Discharge of surety by creditor’s act or omission impairing surety’s eventual remedy.
  • Section 172: “Pledge”, “Pawnor”, and “Pawnee” defined.
  • Section 173: Pawnee’s right of retainer.
  • Section 176: Pawnee’s right where pawnor makes default.
  • Section 182: “Agent” and “principal” defined.
  • Section 197: Ratification may be expressed or implied.

Tips on how to prepare Indian Contract Act

If you are a Judiciary Aspirant, then you have to make sure that you do a proper trend analysis of the question papers of all the previous years. Take the question papers of all the target states and note down all the important sections. Here are keypointers you need to take a note for Judiciary preparation for Indian Contract Act.

  1. Make a list of the important sections that have been asked in the previous Year Judiciary exams.
  2. Start with reading the bare act. You can also refer to the important sections mentioned below.
  3. Make your own notes after understanding all the key pointers.
  4. As contract act is asked in majority of the prelims and mains examinations and therefore you have to prepare for MCQs and Written examination both.
  5. Prepare for Prelims and Mains together while understanding all the concepts.

Learn more: Judiciary Exam 2023 Online Coaching

Notes on Indian Contract Act for Judiciary Preparation

Introduction:

The Contract law is rooted in civil principles, where remedies for breaches primarily involve compensatory and liquidated or unliquidated damages. This legal framework is designed to uphold rights in personam, which are rights claimable exclusively against specific individuals or entities.

The Indian Contract Act of 1872, effective since September 1st, 1872, stands as the codified law governing contracts in India. Section 2 of this act furnishes definitions for critical terms, including 'contract.'

Essential Components of Contracts:

Contracts are defined as legally enforceable agreements, and they hinge on several vital components:

  1. Involvement of Two or More Parties
  2. Capacity to Contract
  3. Free and Voluntary Consent – Parties should not be subject to coercion or deceit.
  4. Lawful Consideration and Lawful Object – Consideration represents what one party commits to do or abstain from doing for the other party, while object pertains to the purpose behind the contract.
  5. Agreement Not Expressly Declared Void – Contracts must not be explicitly prohibited by law.

Stages of Contract Formation:

A contract commences with a proposal or an offer, wherein one party expresses their willingness to perform or abstain from an action in exchange for something of value. The individual making the offer is termed the 'offeror,' and those accepting it are referred to as 'offerees.'

Read About:  Judiciary Exam Preparation Tips

The Key Provisions of the Indian Contract Act of 1872:

When entering into a contract, several crucial provisions must be observed. Below, we discuss some of these provisions:

  1. Offer and Acceptance: A contract necessitates the involvement of at least two parties, one of whom extends an offer, while the other accepts it. The party making the offer is referred to as the "promisor," and the one accepting it is known as the "promisee."

  2. Intention to Create a Legal Relationship: For a contract to be valid, it must have the potential to establish a legal relationship between the parties involved. A contract lacking the capacity to create a legal relationship is deemed invalid. It is imperative that the contract is legally binding and enforceable by the law.

  3. Free Consent: All parties to the contract must genuinely agree to the same terms and conditions, interpreting them in the same manner. The concept of free consent precludes any form of coercion, fraud, or misrepresentation of facts. If a party's consent is obtained under duress, the contract becomes voidable.

  4. Capacity of the Parties: The Indian Contract Act of 1872 stipulates that individuals who have reached the age of majority, possess sound mental faculties, and are not prohibited by the law have the capacity to enter into a contract. Contracts involving minors are void ab initio, as minors lack the legal capacity to contract. Similarly, individuals with unsound minds are also unable to enter into contracts.

Read About: Preparation Plans for the Judicial Services Exam

Essentials of the Indian Contract Act, 1872:

The fundamental requirements for a valid contract under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, are detailed as follows:

  1. Offer and Acceptance: A legal contract necessitates a lawful offer extended by one party and a lawful acceptance of that offer by the other party. An offer signifies a proposal to undertake an action, and acceptance denotes an agreement to the terms of the offer. Effective communication of the offer and acceptance between the parties is vital.
  2. Intention to Create Legal Relations: The parties entering the contract must genuinely intend to establish a legal relationship, and the agreement should not be of a purely social or domestic nature. In essence, the parties must intend for the contract to be legally binding.
  3. Lawful Object: The object or purpose of the contract must adhere to the principles of legality. It should not involve any illegal activities or actions contrary to public policy.
  4. Consideration: Every contract must be supported by valid consideration, which entails something of value exchanged between the parties. This consideration can encompass currency, goods, services, or a commitment to perform or abstain from specific actions. The presence of consideration is a prerequisite for the contract's enforceability.
  5. Capacity of Parties: The parties entering into the contract must possess the legal capacity to do so. This entails sound mental faculties and the absence of legal disqualifications, such as minority or incapacity due to unsoundness of mind.
  6. Free Consent: Consent to the contract must be voluntarily given, free from any form of coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation, or mistake. Contracts obtained through any of these vitiating factors may be voidable.
  7. Certainty and Possibility of Performance: The contract's terms must be clear and definite, with the contract's performance being possible. Vague or uncertain terms should not form the basis of the agreement.
  8. Legal Formalities: Certain contracts may necessitate adherence to specific legal formalities as prescribed by law, such as written agreements, registration, or witnessing.
  9. Not Expressly Declared Void or Illegal: The contract must not be explicitly declared void or illegal under the Indian Contract Act or any other Indian law.
  10. Agreements Not Declared as Void: The contract should not fall within any category of agreements that are expressly declared void by the Act. For instance, agreements without consideration or involving wagering are typically considered void.
  11. Possibility of Performance: The contract should be capable of being performed, and if unforeseen circumstances render performance impossible beyond the parties' control, it may lead to the contract's discharge.

Read about: Upcoming Judiciary Exams

Consideration:

Consideration in a contract refers to the mutual agreement of both parties to undertake or abstain from certain actions. Several essential elements of consideration must be met, some of which are discussed below:

  1. Consensual Origin: Consideration must originate from the promisor's desire, meaning that the act should be performed or refrained from at the promisor's request. Voluntary actions or actions prompted by a third party do not constitute valid consideration.

  2. Source of Consideration: As long as a contract involves lawful consideration, it is not essential to identify the provider of that consideration. The promisor's consent allows the consideration to come from anyone other than the promisee.

  3. Types of Consideration: Consideration in a contract can be categorized into three types:

  • Past Consideration: This involves a voluntary action performed in the past, which enables a party to enter into the contract to undertake or abstain from an action. This is referred to as past consideration.
  • Present Consideration: Also known as executed consideration, this pertains to an action performed in response to a positive promise.
  • Future Consideration: Often called executory consideration, it involves the promisor making an offer, and the promisee accepting the offer with the intention of executing the contract at a future date.

Real and Legally Possible:

Consideration in a contract must be physically and legally feasible. Uncertain consideration renders the contract unenforceable, and if the consideration is physically or legally impossible, the contract is void in the eyes of the law.

Visit Now: Take Free Classes on Indian Contract Act

Lawful Consideration:

For a contract to be valid, it must be in accordance with the law. Consideration is deemed unlawful under the following circumstances:

  • When it is legally prohibited.
  • When it causes harm to another person or their property.
  • When it is against public policy.

Remedies in Case of Breach of Contract:

In cases where a breach of contract occurs, remedies are available to the aggrieved party. These remedies include:

  1. Damages: The party suffering losses due to the breach can seek compensation from the party responsible for the breach.
  2. Injunction: The aggrieved party can request the court to issue an order for the other party to either perform a specific action or refrain from doing something, in accordance with the terms of the contract.
  3. Arbitration: When disputes cannot be resolved through negotiation, arbitration may be used. An arbitrator listens to both sides and makes a decision in the interest of both parties.
  4. Specific Performance: The aggrieved party can approach the court to compel the party in breach to fulfill specific obligations as outlined in the contract.
  5. Rescission: This remedy involves the complete cancellation of the contract, allowing for the return of money or goods exchanged between the parties.

The concept of a proposal in the Indian Contract Act of 1872 is defined under Section 2(a). It states that a proposal occurs when an individual expresses to another their readiness to perform or refrain from an action, aiming to gain the latter's agreement to such behavior or non-behavior. This proposal must be clear and precise, and it needs to be conveyed to the other individual with the intent to secure their consent. When this proposal is accepted, it transforms into a promise, and the agreed terms establish the contractual obligations for both parties. However, if the proposal is not accepted, it is merely seen as an invitation to negotiate and does not establish any legal responsibilities for either party.

Examples:

  1. Company A sends a written email offering to sell its products to Company B at a specified price. This written communication constitutes a proposal, and if Company B accepts, it transforms into a legally binding contract.
  2. During a conversation, Person A orally offers to sell their car to Person B for a particular amount. This verbal offer is also considered a proposal, and if Person B agrees, it results in a binding contract.
  3. A construction company, Company A, submits a comprehensive proposal to a government agency, Company B, outlining the construction project's details, including cost, timeline, and specifications. This proposal serves as an offer to enter into a contract with the government agency, and upon the agency's acceptance, it becomes a legally binding contract.

Read about: How to Prepare for Judiciary Exams from Scratch

What Is an Invitation to Offer?

An invitation to offer is a preliminary communication that encourages or invites someone to make an offer or proposal, rather than constituting an offer itself. It serves as an invitation to negotiate or initiate an offer, with no legal obligation to accept any resulting proposal.

In simpler terms, an invitation to offer is an invitation to start discussions or negotiations and does not create a legal obligation to accept any offers that may arise from it.

Examples of invitations to offer encompass advertisements, price lists, catalogs, and product displays in a shop window or online store. These communications do not establish a binding offer but instead invite customers to propose purchasing.

For instance, when a shop owner displays goods in their store window, it is an invitation for customers to make offers to purchase those goods. The customer's offer to buy the goods at a specific price constitutes a proposal, and if the shop owner accepts it, a binding contract is formed.

Landmark Cases Involving Invitations to Treat/Offers:

  1. Pharmaceutical Products of India Ltd. v. Gwalior Chemical Works Ltd. (1960): In this case, the court affirmed that a price list serves as an invitation to treat, not an offer. It emphasized that a contract arises only when one party makes an offer and the other party accepts it.
  2. Fisher v. Bell (1961): This case established the precedent that displaying goods in a shop window or on a store shelf generally constitutes an invitation to treat, not an offer. The customer's offer to purchase the goods at a particular price is considered a proposal, and if the shop owner accepts, it forms a binding contract.
  3. Harvela Investments Ltd. v. Royal Trust Co. of Canada (1986): This case introduced the concept of an "invitation to tender," where a party invites potential contractors to submit bids for a project. The court ruled that an invitation to tender is not an offer but an invitation to present offers.

Get Details: Why Reading Bare Acts is necessary for Judiciary

Intent to Establish a Legal Relationship:

The intent to establish a legal relationship stands as a fundamental component in the formation of a contract. It signifies the parties' shared desire to create a legally enforceable agreement, one that holds legal weight and can be upheld in a court of law.

As a general principle, the law presumes that parties intend to establish a legal relationship when they engage in a contractual arrangement. Nevertheless, in specific scenarios, parties may not harbor an intention to forge a legally binding contract, particularly in social or domestic contexts. For instance, when friends agree to meet at a café, there may be no intent to create a contract that is legally binding.

For a contract to be valid and enforceable, the intent to establish a legal relationship must exist at the time of entering into the agreement. This implies that both parties must share a mutual intent to create legal relations.

This intent can be either expressed or implied. It may be expressly stated in the contract through the language employed, such as when the parties explicitly declare their intention to create a legally binding agreement. Conversely, the intent may be inferred from the circumstances surrounding the agreement. For example, if an individual provides a service and receives payment for it, there may be an implied intent to establish a legal relationship.

In cases where the parties lack the intent to establish a legal relationship, the agreement cannot be enforced as a contract. Consequently, the existence or absence of this intent plays a pivotal role in ascertaining the legitimacy of a contract.

The necessity of communicating an offer is emphasized in the landmark case of Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt, a significant contract law case decided by the Privy Council in 1913.

In this case, Lalman Shukla served as a laborer for Gauri Dutt, who happened to be Lalman's deceased father's uncle. Gauri Dutt had dispatched Lalman to search for his missing nephew and had offered a reward of Rs. 501 to anyone who successfully located him. However, before Lalman could return with the news of locating Gauri Dutt's nephew, Gauri Dutt became aware of his nephew's demise through other sources.

Subsequently, Gauri Dutt declined to fulfill his promise of the reward, contending that the offer of the reward was only valid for the purpose of finding his nephew alive, and since the nephew was now deceased, there was no outstanding offer to accept.

The court's ruling determined that no contract existed between the parties. It was established that Gauri Dutt's commitment to pay the reward constituted an offer, and Lalman's search for his nephew represented the acceptance of that offer. The court underlined the principle that an offer can be accepted through the performance of the requested action, and Lalman's search was indeed the fulfillment of the requested act.

The court dismissed Gauri Dutt's argument that the offer was exclusively meant for locating his nephew alive. The court clarified that the offer was not restricted to finding the nephew alive but encompassed the act of locating the nephew, irrespective of his vital status. Consequently, the court determined that Lalman had accepted the offer by executing the stipulated task, thereby obligating Gauri Dutt to honor the promised reward.

This case established the fundamental principle that an offer can be accepted through the performance of the specified action, and that an offer may pertain to a specific act rather than a particular outcome.

Types of Offers/Proposals:

Cross Offers: Cross offers occur when two parties unknowingly make identical offers to each other. In such instances, there is no clear indication of an intention to create a legally binding agreement. A notable case related to cross offers is Tinn v. Hoffman (1873), where both parties made matching offers without being aware of the other's offer, resulting in no contract due to the absence of acceptance.

Counter Offers: A counteroffer is a response to an initial offer that alters the terms of the original proposal. It effectively rejects the initial offer and terminates it. A significant case related to counter offers is Hyde v. Wrench (1840), where the plaintiff's counteroffer led to the rejection of the defendant's original offer, rendering any subsequent attempt to accept the original offer ineffective.

Specific and General Offers:

In contract law, offers can be classified into two main types: specific offers and general offers.

  1. Specific Offers: These are offers directed at a particular person or group. For instance, an offer to sell a car to a specific individual at a specific price is a specific offer. It can only be accepted by the intended recipient within the defined terms and timeframe.

  2. General Offers: These offers are extended to the public or a group of potential acceptors. An example is an advertisement offering a reward for the return of a lost item. Anyone meeting the conditions outlined in the offer can claim the reward.

The distinction between specific and general offers holds legal significance. In specific offers, the offeror must sell the item if the offeree accepts within the stipulated terms. In contrast, for general offers, the offeror is obliged to fulfill the offer only when someone meets the conditions and accepts it. This distinction shapes the legal implications and acceptance conditions associated with offers in contract law.

Know more: How to prepare for judiciary exams 

Types of Offers Based on Duration and Acceptance:

In contract law, offers can be categorized into distinct types according to their duration and conditions of acceptance. The three primary categories of offers are standing offers, open offers, and continuing offers.

Standing Offers: A standing offer is an offer directed at a specific individual or group and remains valid for a predetermined duration. It is a form of specific offer that remains open for acceptance throughout the specified timeframe. For instance, if a company offers to sell a particular product to a specific customer at a fixed price for a one-year period, this constitutes a standing offer.

Open Offers: An open offer is a type of general offer accessible to anyone who fulfills the specified criteria. It remains open for a reasonable duration and can be accepted by anyone meeting the designated conditions. For example, if a company offers a reward to anyone who returns a lost item, this qualifies as an open offer.

Continuing Offers: A continuing offer is an offer that remains available for a set period but can be accepted multiple times within that timeframe. For instance, if a company offers to supply a specific product to a customer at a fixed price for one year, and the customer can place orders for the product during that year, this represents a continuing offer.

It is important to recognize that the legal implications associated with these distinct offer types can differ. A standing offer can exclusively be accepted by the intended recipient(s) within the stipulated timeframe. An open offer is open to acceptance by anyone meeting the specified conditions within a reasonable timeframe. In contrast, a continuing offer can be accepted multiple times within the specified duration.

Get Details: Books for Judiciary Mains Exams 

What Is an Offer or Proposal?

The Indian Contract Act, Section 2(a), provides the definition of an offer or proposal. As per this Act, when an individual communicates their willingness to either undertake or abstain from a particular action in order to secure the agreement of another person, it constitutes a proposal. Put simply, when one person conveys their readiness to perform or refrain from an action for the benefit of another person, they are making a proposal.

For instance, when someone presents an offer to sell their bicycle to you at a specific price, let's say Rs. 5,000, this constitutes an actual offer. A contract comes into existence when both you and the seller reach an agreement regarding the sale, and all relevant details are clearly defined. Once you accept the offer, complete the payment of the agreed-upon amount of Rs. 5,000, and take possession of the bicycle, the contract is considered fulfilled or "executed."

What Is an 'Invitation to Offer' or 'Invitation to Treat'?

An invitation to offer, or invitation to treat, does not involve a specific party's intent to enter into a contract. Instead, it signifies that the seller is open to entering into a contract with any member of the public who submits the most favorable offer. In essence, in an invitation to treat, it is the seller who is making the offer.

For instance, when a shopkeeper in an antique store wishes to sell antique statues, they are open to entering into a contract with the buyer offering the highest price. Similarly, when clothing items are displayed in a store, goods are presented in an auction, or advertisements announce discounts such as "Offer! 50% Off on All Shirts!"—these are all invitations to treat rather than actual offers.

As a result, the process of forming a contract differs between an invitation to treat and an offer. It commences with an invitation to treat, such as the display of goods and their prices. When an individual submits a satisfactory offer, and the seller accepts it, a contract is then established. In contrast to an offer initiated by the seller to the buyer, an invitation to treat empowers the buyer to initiate the contractual process.

The Role of Intention:

In the context of offers and invitations to treat, intention plays a significant role. In an offer, both parties harbor the intent to enter into a legally binding agreement following a proper negotiation. Conversely, such intent is not present in an invitation to offer. For instance, a person might visit a store on their way home from work, peruse through displayed books or clothing without the immediate intention of making a purchase. Similarly, sellers may choose not to sell their goods to a specific customer if the customer is unwilling to meet the desired price.

In an offer, there exists a clear intent to establish a contract, while an invitation to offer does not carry the same intent. It allows for greater flexibility and negotiation between the involved parties before arriving at a final agreement.

Know More: Why solving previous year's question papers is important

Differences Between Offer and Invitation to Offer:

Here are the distinctions between an offer and an invitation to treat:

Definition:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer is not an offer itself; it signifies a willingness to engage in contract negotiations.
  • Offer: An offer occurs when someone expresses their willingness to perform or refrain from an action to secure the other party's agreement.

Purpose:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer aims to solicit an offer from the other party.
  • Offer: An offer is presented to obtain acceptance from the other party.

Defined In:

  • Invitation to offer: The concept of an invitation to offer is not explicitly defined in the Indian Contract Act 1872.
  • Offer: The definition of an offer is provided in section 2(a) of the Indian Contract Act 1872.

Acceptance:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer can transform into an offer if accepted by the other party.
  • Offer: An offer becomes a binding agreement upon acceptance by the other party.

Legal Consequences:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer does not lead to legal consequences.
  • Offer: An offer results in legal consequences and can serve as the foundation for a contract.

Made To:

  • Invitation to offer: An invitation to offer can be extended to a group.
  • Offer: An offer is typically made to a specific party.

Example:

  • Invitation to offer: A bookseller sending a catalog of books with prices listed.
  • Offer: If an individual interested in any book from the catalog offers to purchase it from the seller.

Read about: How to make a career in Judiciary

Agreement:

The concept of an agreement is outlined in section 2(e) of the Indian Contract Act 1872. An agreement constitutes a form of promise between two parties, and it inherently involves consideration. A notable illustration of an agreement is a rental agreement. In a rental agreement, both parties (the property owner and the tenant) participate, and consideration takes the form of monetary payment, typically rent.

There are several critical aspects that are essential to an agreement, including:

  1. Parties: An agreement invariably involves a minimum of two parties, but it can encompass more than two, contingent upon the circumstances or conditions.
  2. Offer: A pivotal component of an agreement is the presence of an offer between the parties. One party must proffer an offer to the other, and this offer is explicitly stated within the agreement.
  3. Acceptance: Upon the presentation of an offer by one party, it is imperative that the other party accepts the offer. The acceptance must align with the will or intention of the accepting party.
  4. Promises: Both parties within the agreement commit to fulfilling all the duties and obligations as stipulated in the agreement.
  5. Consideration: Consideration signifies the exchange of value, typically in monetary or other tangible forms, as a price for the promises made within the agreement.

Know More: Eligibility for Judiciary Exams

Section 3 of the Indian Contract Act 1872 - Communication of the Proposal:

Effective communication is pivotal for both legal and personal relationships. Communication of the proposal signifies that all the terms and conditions should be conveyed to the other party, ensuring clarity in the minds of both parties. Communication can take two forms: implied or expressed. Expressed communication occurs through written or spoken words, where one party conveys their viewpoint or conditions in writing or speech. In contrast, implied communication happens when one party comprehends the point or conditions without verbalizing them; no exchange of words occurs in implied communication.

The essential requirements for a valid agreement under this section include:

  1. Communication to Both Parties: The agreement should be communicated to both parties, whether in implied or expressed form. Failure to communicate the proposal can lead to doubts and misinterpretations, potentially causing confusion between the parties.
  2. Inclusion of a Promise: The proposal must incorporate a promise; without a promise, the agreement is void and unenforceable.
  3. Validity and Certainty: The proposal must be valid and certain, meaning the conditions mentioned in the contract or agreement must have a realistic possibility of being fulfilled. Immaterial or impossible clauses should not be included in the proposal.
  4. Expression of Intention: The proposal should clearly express the intentions of both the promisor and the promisee, minimizing misunderstandings regarding the proposal.
  5. Avoidance of Negative Statements: Negative statements should be avoided in the proposal, as they can create a negative impression and discord between the parties.
  6. Clear and Understandable Terms: The proposal should include all the terms and conditions intended for the contract, and these terms should be presented in simple, easily understandable language.
  7. Absence of False Statements or Fraud: The proposal should not contain false statements or any fraudulent elements.

A career in Judiciary in India - Life and Other Benefits

Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act - Completion of Communication: Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act states that communication is considered complete when it reaches the intended recipient. The communication is deemed accepted when the recipient acknowledges and accepts the contract or proposal.

Section 5 of the Indian Contract Act - Revocation of the Proposal and Acceptance:

The proposal can be revoked by the offering party before the communication is accepted by the promisee. For instance, if person X intends to sell their watch to person Y, X can revoke the agreement before Y accepts it. The proposal can be revoked at any time before the promisee's acceptance of the offer.

Section 6 of the Indian Contract Act – Revocation Methods:

6.1. Revocation may occur through the communication of a notice of revocation by the proposer to the other party.

6.2. Revocation can also happen by the lapse of time. If the other party does not accept the offer within the specified time frame, the proposer has the opportunity to revoke it. In cases where no specific time is prescribed, revocation can occur within a reasonable time based on the circumstances.

6.3. Revocation is possible by the failure to fulfill the conditions set by the acceptor. This means that if the contract fails to meet the conditions desired by the other party, it can be revoked.

6.4. Revocation may also take place upon the death of the proposer, provided that the acceptor becomes aware of the death before accepting the offer. If the proposer passes away before the acceptance of the agreement, the agreement can be revoked prior to acceptance.

Get details: Learn how to become a Civil Judge

Section 7 of the Indian Contract Act – Absolute Acceptance:

For the transformation of the proposal into a promise, acceptance:

7.1. Must be absolute and unqualified, as it holds significance in every agreement or contract.

7.2. Should be expressed in a reasonable manner to notify the other party of the acceptance. If the proposal specifies a particular method of acceptance and it is not adhered to, the proposer may, within a reasonable time, insist that the proposal be accepted in the prescribed manner. If the acceptor fails to comply, the acceptance is considered valid.

Section 8 of the Indian Contract Act – Acceptance by Performing, Conditions, or Receiving Consideration:

If the offer contains conditions, and the acceptor agrees to those conditions, it is deemed an acceptance of the offer by the acceptor. Similarly, if there is an acceptance of the consideration, it signifies acceptance of the proposal. Once the person accepts the consideration, they cannot return the goods.

Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act – Promises, Express and Implied:

This section addresses implied and expressed promises. If the proposal and acceptance are communicated through words or in writing, they are considered expressed promises. Conversely, promises made other than through words or writing are regarded as implied promises. For example, if person X parks their car, and person Z voluntarily starts cleaning the car, it is considered an implied offer as it is done by Z of their own volition.

What is a standard-form contract?

A standard-form contract is a pre-drafted contract in which the terms and conditions are fixed and not subject to negotiation. Typically, one party creates and provides this contract to the other party for signature. Standard-form contracts are also referred to as adhesion contracts or boilerplate contracts.

Know More: How to Become a Civil Judge in MP

Doctrine of Unconscionability

The doctrine of unconscionability empowers a court to refuse the enforcement of a contract if it is deemed to be unconscionable or oppressive to the party with less bargaining power. This implies that if the contract terms are excessively harsh or one-sided, a court may either declare the contract void or make modifications to ensure fairness.

Legal Safeguards

Several legal safeguards have been put in place to protect consumers, employees, and other parties with weaker bargaining positions in standard form contracts. For instance, the Consumer Protection Act of 2019 grants consumers the right to lodge complaints against unfair trade practices and promotes equitable competition.

Implied Clauses

On occasion, courts may insert certain clauses into a contract to safeguard the interests of the party with less bargaining power. For instance, in employment contracts, courts may imply a duty of good faith and equitable treatment on the part of the employer towards the employee.

Duty of Disclosure

The party with superior bargaining power is obligated to disclose any pertinent information that might influence the decision of the weaker party to enter into the contract. Failure to make such disclosures can lead to the contract being declared null and void.

Right to Rescind

The weaker party may possess the right to rescind the contract if they were induced to enter into it through misrepresentation, fraud, or undue influence.

Landmark Cases on Standard Form Contracts Road Transport Corporation v. Kirloskar Brothers In this case, the court ruled that contractual terms must be effectively communicated to the party intended to be bound by them. If a consignment note is not signed at the time of delivering goods for transportation, and the terms of the consignment note exclude the jurisdiction of specific courts, they are not binding on the consignor or consignee. Therefore, the court emphasized the importance of providing reasonable notice of contractual terms.

Acceptance According to the Indian Contract Act 1872

In accordance with the Indian Contract Act of 1872, acceptance represents the final and unambiguous expression of agreement with the terms outlined in a proposal. The manner and timing of acceptance should align with the proposal's specifications, or if no timeframe is stipulated, it must occur within a reasonable period.

Section 2(b) of the Act provides the following definition for acceptance:

"When the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted. A proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise."

A valid acceptance is characterized by the following criteria:

  1. It must come from the person to whom the proposal is directed.
  2. It must adhere to the method prescribed by the proposer.
  3. It must be tendered within the stipulated time or within a reasonable timeframe.
  4. It must be absolute and devoid of conditions.

Failure to meet the prescribed method or time for acceptance renders it invalid, and the proposer is no longer bound by the proposal. Furthermore, acceptance can take the form of an explicit or implicit response. Explicit acceptance is conveyed through spoken or written words, while implicit acceptance is inferred from the offeree's behavior.

Communication of Acceptance The principle "Acceptance must be communicated" is a fundamental tenet of contract law, signifying that the offeree's acceptance of a proposal or offer must be conveyed to the offeror for a contract to gain legal validity.

In essence, when one party extends an offer to another party, the latter must communicate their acceptance to the former for the contract to hold legal weight. This communication can be executed through various reasonable means, including written or oral communication or through actions. However, this communication must occur within a reasonable timeframe and must be unambiguous and unconditional.

Failure to communicate acceptance of an offer results in the absence of a contract, and the offeror is not bound by the terms of the offer. Hence, it is imperative for the offeree to communicate their acceptance within a reasonable timeframe to establish the legal validity of the contract.

Get Details: Madhya Pradesh Judiciary Exam 

Acceptance

Through Conduct Acceptance through conduct, also known as acceptance by performance or acceptance by behavior, is a contractual concept in which a contract is established through the actions or behavior of the parties involved. In this form of acceptance, there is no explicit communication of acceptance from the offeree to the offeror; instead, acceptance is inferred from the conduct of the offeree.

For example, when an individual places an order for a product online and the seller delivers the product without explicitly receiving formal acceptance, the buyer's acceptance is demonstrated through their conduct of accepting and using the product.

Acceptance through conduct is generally recognized as valid when the offeree's behavior aligns with the terms of the offer, clearly indicating their acceptance of the offer.

However, it's important to note that acceptance by conduct is only applicable when the offeror has effectively communicated the offer, and there is no requirement for the offer to be accepted through explicit communication. The conduct of the offeree must unambiguously indicate their acceptance of the offer.

A classic example of acceptance by conduct is the case of Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company, where the court ruled that the plaintiff's conduct (using the smoke ball as directed) constituted acceptance of the offer made by the defendant, resulting in the formation of a contract between the parties.

Completion of Communication: The Indian Contract Act, 1872 provides rules for determining when the communication of acceptance is considered complete. According to Section 4 of the Act, communication of acceptance is deemed complete in the following circumstances:

  1. As against the proposer (offeror): When the acceptance is dispatched, putting it on its way to the offeror, and it is beyond the control of the acceptor. This means that once the acceptance is sent via post or other authorized means, it is considered complete. Even if it is lost, delayed, or damaged in transit, it is still valid as long as it is correctly addressed, stamped, and sent.

  2. As against the acceptor (offeree): When the proposer becomes aware of the acceptance. If the acceptance is directly communicated to the offeror, either by the offeree themselves or through a messenger, communication of acceptance is complete as soon as the proposer is informed of it.

  3. When transmitted through an authorized means: If the acceptance is transmitted through a recognized and authorized method, such as postal service, telegraph, or fax, communication is considered complete when the message is sent.

Acceptance by Post : Acceptance by post is a common method of accepting an offer in contract law. It is based on the principle that communication is complete when the acceptance is dispatched, as outlined in Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. When an offeree accepts an offer by post, the communication of acceptance is considered complete as soon as the acceptance is posted. This means that the acceptance is legally effective even if it gets lost, delayed, or damaged in the postal system, as long as it is properly addressed, stamped, and posted.

Void Agreements

Under the Indian Contract Act, certain agreements are deemed void, meaning they are not legally binding and have no legal effect. These void agreements are outlined in various sections of the Act:

  1. Agreements with Unlawful Considerations and Objects (Section 24): Agreements are void if their considerations or objects are unlawful in part. If any part of the consideration or object of an agreement involves illegal or prohibited activities, the entire agreement becomes void.
  2. Agreements Without Consideration (Section 25): Agreements made without any consideration are void unless they fall within certain exceptions specified in the Act. Consideration is an essential element of a valid contract.
  3. Agreements in Restraint of Marriage (Section 26): Agreements that impose unreasonable restrictions on marriage are void. While some restrictions on marriage may be valid, agreements that entirely prevent a person from marrying or impose harsh conditions are void.
  4. Agreements in Restraint of Trade (Section 27): Agreements that unreasonably restrict a person's freedom to carry on a lawful profession, trade, or business are void. However, reasonable restrictions, such as non-compete clauses in employment contracts, are allowed.
  5. Agreements in Restraint of Legal Proceedings (Section 28): Agreements that hinder access to legal remedies or obstruct the enforcement of legal rights are void. Such agreements aim to prevent parties from seeking legal redress for disputes and are not enforceable.

Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act renders agreements made by way of wager void. It prohibits the filing of lawsuits to recover anything claimed to be won on a wager or entrusted to someone based on the outcome of an uncertain event involving a wager.

There is an exception to this rule regarding certain prizes in horse-racing. Section 30 does not make unlawful subscriptions, contributions, or agreements related to awards valued at ₹500 or more for the winners of horse-races.

It's important to note that Section 294A of the Indian Penal Code, which pertains to betting and gambling in connection with horse-racing, remains unaffected by the provisions of this section.

Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act outlines the criteria for individuals who are competent to enter into contracts. Competence to contract is determined by the following conditions:

  1. Age of Majority: The individual must have reached the age of majority as determined by the law applicable to them.
  2. Sound Mind: The person must be of sound mind, indicating that they are mentally capable of understanding the terms and consequences of the contract.
  3. Not Disqualified by Law: The individual must not be disqualified from entering into contracts by any relevant law that applies to them.

As per this section, the following categories of individuals are not considered competent to contract:

(a) Minors: Individuals who have not yet reached the age of majority, i.e., minors. (b) Persons of Unsound Mind: Individuals who are not of sound mind, meaning they lack the mental capacity to comprehend the contract. (c) Individuals Disqualified by Law: Individuals who are prohibited from entering into contracts by specific legal provisions.

Quasi Contracts: Quasi contracts are legal situations where one party is obligated to perform certain duties and the other party is entitled to specific rights, even in the absence of a formal contract. These situations are not actual contracts but are treated as such by the court for fairness and justice. Quasi contracts are based on the principle that one should not unjustly benefit from another's actions, even in the absence of an agreement.

Under the law, these quasi contracts fall into several categories:

  1. Section 68 - Claim for Necessaries Supplied to a Person Incapable of Contracting or on Their Behalf: This section addresses situations where a person, unable to enter into a contract, or someone legally responsible for them, receives necessary supplies from another individual. In such cases, the provider of the supplies has the right to seek reimbursement from the assets of the incapable person.

Example:

  • If person A provides necessary items suitable for the condition of person B, who is legally incapacitated (e.g., a lunatic), A has the right to be reimbursed from B's assets.

In quasi contracts, it is not an agreement or intention that defines the obligation; instead, it is a sense of duty, driven by principles of equity, conscience, justice, and fairness, that guides the legal recognition and enforcement of these obligations.

Quasi contracts encompass various legal situations where one party is obligated to perform certain duties, and the other party is entitled to specific rights, even in the absence of a formal contract. These quasi contracts are recognized by the court to uphold principles of fairness, equity, and justice, even in the absence of a prior agreement.

Know more: MP Judiciary Application Form

Under the law, these quasi contracts fall into several categories:

Section 68 - Reimbursement for Necessaries Supplied to an Incapacitated Person or on Their Behalf: This section addresses scenarios where a person, incapable of contracting, or someone legally responsible for them, receives necessary supplies from another individual. In such cases, the provider of the supplies has the right to seek reimbursement from the assets of the incapable person.

Examples:

  • If person A provides necessary items suitable for the condition of person B, who is legally incapacitated (e.g., a lunatic), A has the right to be reimbursed from B's assets.
  • Additionally, if A supplies the wife and children of B, who is a lunatic, with necessary items suited to their condition, A is entitled to reimbursement from B's property.

Section 69 - Reimbursement for Payment of Another Person's Debt with an Interest: This section pertains to situations where a person pays money that another is legally bound to pay, and the paying party has a vested interest in such payment. In these cases, the individual who made the payment is entitled to reimbursement by the person legally bound to pay.

Examples:

  • If person B, holding land in Bengal, is at risk of losing their lease due to unpaid revenue to the Government by A, the zamindar, B may pay the outstanding amount to prevent the sale and lease annulment. A, in this case, is obligated to reimburse B for the sum paid.

Section 70 - Compensation for Non-Gratuitous Acts: This section addresses scenarios where one person lawfully performs a service or delivers something to another person without intending to do so gratuitously. If the recipient benefits from this act, they are obliged to provide compensation to the person who performed the service or delivered the item.

Examples:

  • If person A, a tradesman, mistakenly leaves goods at B's house, and B considers them his own, B is obligated to pay A for the goods.

Section 71 - Responsibility of Finders of Goods: This section establishes that a person who finds goods belonging to another and takes them into their custody is held to the same responsibility as a bailee.

Section 72 - Liability for Money or Property Received by Mistake or Under Coercion: This section outlines that a person who receives money or property by mistake or under coercion must repay or return it.

Examples:

  • If A and B jointly owe 100 rupees to C, and A pays the full amount to C without B's knowledge, leading B to pay 100 rupees again to C, C is obligated to repay the redundant sum to B.
  • In another instance, if a railway company demands an illegal charge for carriage before releasing certain goods to the consignee, and the consignee pays this fee to obtain the goods, the consignee has the right to recover the excessive, illegally charged amount.

Contingent Contracts:

A contingent contract, as defined by Section 31, is an agreement to perform or refrain from an action based on the occurrence or non-occurrence of an event related to the contract. The key elements of a contingent contract include uncertainty and futurity of the event, with the event being collateral to the contract.

Agreements contingent on impossible event void Section 36 provides that contingent agreements to do or not to do anything, if an impossible event happens, are void, whether the impossibility of th event is known or not to the parties to the agreement at the time when it is made.

Example – (a) A agrees to pay B `1,000/- if two straight lines should enclose a space. This agreement is void. (b) A agrees to pay B `1,000/- if B will marry A’s daughter C. C, was dead at the time of the agreement. The agreement is void.

Termination of Contracts:

When a contract's rights and obligations cease to be in effect, the contract is considered discharged or terminated. In simpler terms, the discharge of a contract signifies the conclusion of the contractual relationship between the parties involved. Various methods or modes exist through which a contract can be discharged, effectively bringing it to an end.

Understand now: Judiciary Exam syllabus

Modes of Contract Discharge:

There are several methods or modes by which a contract can be discharged, signifying the end of the contractual relationship. These methods are as follows:

  1. Discharge by Performance: The contract is discharged when both parties fulfill their respective obligations as per the contract terms, leading to the successful completion of the contract.
  2. Discharge by Agreement: The contract can be discharged by mutual agreement between the parties, often through negotiation, where they reach a consensus to terminate the contract.
  3. Discharge by Lapse of Time: If the contract specifies a time frame for its performance, and that time elapses without fulfillment, the contract is discharged due to the passage of time.
  4. Discharge by Operation of Law: Certain legal events or circumstances may lead to the automatic termination of the contract as prescribed by law.
  5. Discharge by Impossibility of Performance: When it becomes impossible for one or both parties to fulfill their contractual obligations due to unforeseen circumstances or impossibility, the contract is discharged.
  6. Discharge by Breach of Contract: If one party fails to fulfill its contractual obligations, resulting in a breach of contract, the non-breaching party may choose to terminate the contract, thereby discharging it.

Contracts of Indemnity and Guarantee

Chapter VIII of the Act addresses the concepts of contracts of indemnity and guarantee. While Sections 124 and 125 pertain to contracts of indemnity, the remaining provisions deal with contracts of guarantee.

Contract of Indemnity

According to Section 124 of the Act, a 'contract of indemnity' is defined as an agreement in which one party promises to safeguard the other from any loss incurred due to the actions of the promisor themselves or the actions of any other individual.

Example: A enters into an agreement to indemnify B against any legal proceedings initiated by C concerning a certain sum of ₹2 lakhs. This constitutes a contract of indemnity.

This type of contract involves two key parties: the indemnifier and the indemnity holder. The indemnifier is the person offering the promise to indemnify against losses, while the indemnity holder is the person whose losses are being covered. Indemnify, in this context, doesn't solely mean reimbursement of monetary payments but also includes protection against losses associated with the liability for which indemnity is provided.

A contract of indemnity can be expressed through explicit terms or implied by the circumstances. For instance, in the case of 'Kuppan Chettiar v. Ramaswami Chettiar,' it was determined that there exists an implied contract by law in which the person requesting indemnification is obligated to keep the person with the duty indemnified against any resulting liability from the exercise of the supposed duty.

In the case of 'The New India Assurance Co. Limited v. State Trading Corporation of India,' it was noted that nearly all insurances, excluding life and personal accident insurances, can be considered contracts of indemnity.

Furthermore, in the case of 'National Overseas v. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Limited,' it was established that when an export risk policy is issued by the Export Credit Guarantee Corporation and the exporter voluntarily consigns shipments to the buyer at their own risk without adhering to the policy's terms, the corporation is not liable to indemnify the loss incurred by the exporter.

Get details: Judiciary preparation process

Rights of the Indemnity Holder When Sued

Section 125 outlines the rights of an indemnity holder when facing legal action. According to this section, a promise made in a contract of indemnity allows the indemnity holder, acting within their authorized scope, to recover the following from the promisor:

  • All damages they may be compelled to pay in a lawsuit related to the subject matter covered by the promise to indemnify.

Indemnity

The term 'indemnity' refers to protection against future loss. It involves a promise to compensate for losses in the form of money, goods, or other forms of loss. It serves as security or compensation against incurred losses.

According to Halsbury, indemnity encompasses both express and implied contracts designed to shield a person who has entered into or is about to enter into a contract or incur any other obligation from potential losses, irrespective of any default by a third party.

As per the Oxford Dictionary of Law, indemnity is an agreement where one person commits to pay another person a sum that is currently owed or may become owed by a third party. It is not dependent on the third party's failure to make payment.

Guarantee

Guarantee enables a person to obtain a loan or acquire goods on credit by offering surety or assuming responsibility. It is an agreement to take responsibility for another person's debt if they default on it.

The Oxford Dictionary of Law defines a guarantee as a secondary agreement in which a person (guarantor) becomes liable for a debt or default of another person (principal debtor), who is primarily responsible for the debt. A guarantor who fulfills their guarantee has the right to seek indemnification from the principal debtor.

Contract of Indemnity

Chapter VIII of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 contains legal provisions governing contracts of indemnity and guarantees in India.

Section 124: Contract of Indemnity

Section 124 of the Act defines a contract of indemnity as an agreement in which one party promises to protect the other party from losses caused either by the promisor's own actions or by the actions of any other person.

A contract of indemnity can offer protection against losses resulting from:

  1. The actions of the promisor.
  2. The actions of any other person.

Under Indian law, a contract of indemnity covers losses caused by human agency. In contrast, English law includes losses caused by the acts of the promisor or any other person, as well as other events like fires or accidents.

Indemnifier

The person making the promise to indemnify against losses or make good the losses (the promisor) is referred to as the indemnifier.

Indemnity-Holder

The person for whom the promise to indemnify is made (the promisee) is known as the indemnity-holder.

For example, if Anil enters into a contract with Swapnil to indemnify him against any legal proceedings initiated by Mrinal concerning a certain sum of Rs. 2000/-, Anil is the indemnifier, and Swapnil is the indemnity-holder.

Main Features

  • Involves two parties: the promisor (indemnifier) and the promisee (indemnity-holder).
  • The primary objective of a contract of indemnity is to provide protection against losses.
  • According to the Indian Contract Act, the contract of indemnity must aim to indemnify against losses resulting from the promisor's actions or the actions of any other person.
  • It is not contingent upon the default of a third party.

Understand this: Tips to prepare for an interview for the Civil Judge Examination

Rights of an Indemnity Holder

Section 125 of the Act outlines the 'Rights of an Indemnity Holder When Sued.' This section pertains to the rights of an indemnity holder to seek compensation and recover costs when they are compelled to pay in a legal suit. These rights are contingent upon the existence of a contract of indemnity. The rights of the indemnity holder include:

  1. Right to Recover Damages: The indemnity holder has the right to recover from the promisor the damages they were compelled to pay in any lawsuit related to the matter covered by the promise to indemnify.

  2. Right to Recover Costs: The indemnity holder can recover all the costs they were compelled to pay in a lawsuit, provided that:

    • They did not violate any of the promisor's orders when initiating or defending the suit.
    • They acted in a manner that a prudent person would have in the absence of the contract of indemnity, or the promisor authorized them to file or defend the suit.
  3. Right to Recover Compromise Amounts: The indemnity holder has the right to recover any sums they paid as part of a compromise in a lawsuit, provided that:

    • The compromise did not contravene the promisor's orders.
    • The compromise is one that the promisee would have made while acting prudently, even if the contract of indemnity did not exist, or the promisor had authorized the promisee to make the compromise.

Commencement of Liability

An important aspect of a contract of indemnity is determining when the liability to indemnify arises. Under English law, the traditional rule was that the indemnity holder could only recover if they had suffered actual losses, commonly known as "you must be damnified before you can claim to be indemnified." However, this rule evolved. In the case of Richardson Re, Ex parte the Governors of St. Thomas’s Hospital (1911), it was established that indemnity is not limited to repayment after payment; it also includes situations where the indemnity holder never has to make a payment. The Calcutta High Court, in Osman Jamal & Sons Ltd. v. Gopal Purshottam (1928), followed this principle.

Regarding the Indian position, the Bombay High Court in Gajanan Moreshwar v. Moreshwar Madan (1942) held that the equitable principle applied in England should also apply in India. Therefore, when the indemnity holder incurs absolute liability, they can call upon the indemnifier to discharge that liability and make the payment.

Contract of Guarantee

Section 126 of the Indian Contract Act defines the term 'contract of guarantee' and related terms. The purpose of a contract of guarantee is to provide additional security to a creditor by ensuring that the surety will pay the creditor if the debtor defaults.

Contract of Guarantee (Section 126): A contract of guarantee is an agreement to perform the promise or discharge the liability of a third person in case of their default.

This type of contract involves three parties:

  • Surety: The person providing the guarantee.
  • Principal Debtor: The person primarily responsible for the debt.
  • Creditor: The person to whom the guarantee is given.

For example, if Anil orders goods worth Rs. 2000/- from Swapnil on credit, and Mrinal guarantees to pay if Anil fails to do so, it constitutes a contract of guarantee. Here, Rs. 2000 is the principal debt, Anil is the principal debtor, Mrinal is the surety, and Swapnil is the creditor.

Key Features of a Contract of Guarantee

  1. Oral or Written: A contract of guarantee, as per Section 126, may be either oral or in writing. However, under English law, a written and signed document is typically required for a valid contract of guarantee.

  2. Existence of Principal Debt: A principal debt is essential for a contract of guarantee. Without a pre-existing obligation to pay, there is no basis for a promise or guarantee. If a promise is made to compensate for loss without an underlying principal debt, it becomes a contract of indemnity.

  3. Tripartite Nature: A contract of guarantee involves three parties, leading to three separate contracts:

  • The principal debtor commits to making payment to the creditor.
  • The surety undertakes to pay the creditor if the principal debtor defaults.
  • An implied promise by the principal debtor in favor of the surety to indemnify them in case they discharge the debtor's liability.
  1. Payment upon Default: In a contract of guarantee, the surety's promise to pay is contingent upon the debtor's default. The surety pays only when the debtor fails to do so.

  2. Consideration as Benefit to Debtor: Section 127 specifies that anything done or promised for the benefit of the principal debtor can serve as sufficient consideration for the surety providing the guarantee. For instance, if Anil refrains from suing Swapnil for a year, benefiting Swapnil (the debtor), Mrinal (the surety) may provide a guarantee as sufficient consideration.

  3. Consent without Misrepresentation or Concealment: Section 142 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 states that a guarantee obtained through misrepresentation by the creditor or with their knowledge or consent regarding a material aspect of the transaction is invalid. Section 143 also invalidates a guarantee obtained by the creditor if they keep silent about a material circumstance.

These features characterize a contract of guarantee, which is a legally binding agreement designed to ensure the fulfillment of a debtor's obligations through the involvement of a surety and creditor.

Difference between contract of indemnity and contract of guarantee   

BASIS OF DISTINCTION CONTRACT OF INDEMNITY CONTRACT OF GUARANTEE
Parties  There are two parties in a contract of indemnity, namely the indemnifier and the indemnity holder. There are three parties in a contract of guarantee, namely the principal debtor, the creditor, and the surety. 
No. of contracts It consists of only one contract between the indemnifier and the indemnity holder. The indemnifier promises to indemnify the indemnified/indemnity holder in event of a certain loss. It consists of three contracts-A contract between principal debtor and creditor wherein the debtor promises to perform his obligation/make payment. The contract between surety and creditor wherein the surety promises to perform the aforesaid obligation/make the payment if the principal debtor makes a default. An implied contract between the surety and the principal debtor. The principal debtor bounds himself to indemnify the surety for the sum that he has paid under the guarantee undertaken by him.
3. Nature of liability The liability of the indemnifier is primary. The liability in a contract of indemnity is contingent in the sense that it may or may not arise. The liability of the surety is a secondary one, i.e., his obligation to pay arises only when the principal debtor defaults. Liability in a contract of guarantee is continuing in the sense that once the guarantee has been acted upon, the liability of the surety automatically arises. However, the said liability remains in suspended animation until the debtor makes default.
Default of third person The liability of an indemnifier is not conditional on the default of somebody else. For example, Mrinal promises the shopkeeper to pay, by telling him that, “Let Anil have the goods, I will be your paymaster”. This is a contract of indemnity as the promise to pay by Mrinal is not conditional on default by Anil. Liability of surety is conditional on the default of the principal debtor. For example, Ajit buys goods from a seller and Mrinal tells the seller that if Ajit doesn’t pay you, I will. This is a contract of guarantee. Thus, the liability of Mrinal is conditional on non-payment by Ajit.
Principal debt No requirement of the principal debt. Principal debt is necessary. (refer to the previous example)
Whether subsequent recovery is possible Once the indemnifier indemnifies the indemnity holder, he cannot recover that amount from anybody else. After the surety has made the payment, he steps into the shoes of the creditor and can recover the sums paid by him from the principal debtor.
Whether a contract has to be in writing or can be oral as well  In India, contracts of indemnity may be either oral or written.  In India, a contract of guarantee may be either oral or written. 

Continuing Guarantee

Section 129 of the Act defines a "continuing guarantee" as a guarantee that extends to a series of transactions. Here are some examples to illustrate this concept:

  • A promises B to be responsible for the due collection and payment of rents by C for B's zamindari, up to the amount of `5,000. This guarantee is considered a continuing guarantee.
  • A guarantees payment to B, a tea dealer, up to $100 for any tea supplied by B to C over time. B initially supplies tea worth $100, which C pays for. Later, B supplies tea worth $200, and C fails to pay. A's guarantee in this case is a continuing guarantee, and A is liable for the initial $100.
  • A guarantees the price of five sacks of flour to be delivered by B to C, to be paid for in a month. After the delivery and payment for five sacks, B delivers four more sacks, which C doesn't pay for. A's guarantee in this case is not continuing, and he is not liable for the price of the additional four sacks.

A continuing guarantee can either be specific, limited to a particular debtor or liability amount, or it can extend to a series of transactions, making it continuing in nature.

Revocation of Continuing Guarantee

A continuing guarantee can be revoked by the surety in two ways:

  1. Revocation by Surety: Section 130 of the Act allows the surety to revoke a continuing guarantee as to future transactions by providing notice to the creditor. For example, if A has provided a continuing guarantee for 12 months but wishes to revoke it after three months, A can do so, discharging themselves from liability for future transactions. However, A would still be liable for any transactions that occurred before the revocation.
  2. Revocation upon the Death of Surety: Section 131 states that in the absence of any contrary agreement, the death of the surety operates as a revocation of a continuing guarantee, but only with regard to future transactions. This means that if the surety passes away, their liability under the continuing guarantee ceases for transactions occurring after their death.

These provisions govern the revocation of continuing guarantees, ensuring that the surety has the ability to limit their future liability under such guarantees.

Section 140: Subrogation and Conditions for Surety's Rights

Section 140 of the Indian Contract Act deals with the concept of subrogation and outlines the conditions under which a surety can be invested with the rights of the creditor against the principal debtor. Subrogation occurs when the guarantor clears their liability by making a payment, and as a result, they are entitled to step into the shoes of the creditor regarding their rights. To achieve this, the following conditions must be fulfilled:

  1. The guaranteed debt must have become due, or the principal debtor must have defaulted in performing the guaranteed duty.

  2. The surety must have paid the entire debt or performed all that they are liable for.

Only when both of these conditions are met can the surety call upon the creditor to invest them with all the rights that the creditor had against the principal debtor.

Invalid Guarantee

Certain guarantees are considered invalid under the Indian Contract Act. These include:

  1. Guarantee Obtained by Misrepresentation (Section 142): Any guarantee obtained through misrepresentation made by the creditor, or with the creditor's knowledge and consent, concerning a material aspect of the transaction is invalid.

  2. Guarantee Obtained by Concealment (Section 143): Any guarantee obtained by the creditor by keeping silent about material circumstances is also invalid.

Know More: career as a civil judge

Examples of Invalid Guarantees:

  • A hires B as a clerk to collect money, and B fails to account for some of the receipts. A asks B to provide security for proper accounting, and C gives a guarantee for B's accounting. However, A does not inform C about B's previous misconduct. When B later defaults, the guarantee is invalid.

  • A guarantees payment to C for iron to be supplied to B, to the amount of 2000 tons. B and C privately agree that B will pay an extra `5/- per ton, which will go towards an old debt. This agreement is concealed from A. A is not liable as a surety.

Co-surety (Section 144):

Section 144 deals with co-sureties, where two or more individuals act as sureties for the same debt or duty, either jointly or separately, and under the same or different contracts, with or without each other's knowledge. In the absence of any specific agreement to the contrary, co-sureties are liable to pay equally among themselves. This means that each co-surety is responsible for an equal share of the entire debt, or that part of it which remains unpaid by the principal debtor.

Examples of Co-surety Liability:

  • A, B, and C act as sureties for D under three separate bonds, each with a different penalty. D makes a default of 30,000 rupees. As co-sureties, A, B, and C are each liable to pay 10,000 rupees, contributing equally.

Implied Promise to Indemnify the Surety

Section 145 of the Indian Contract Act addresses the concept of an implied promise within every contract of guarantee. In such contracts, there exists an inherent promise by the principal debtor to indemnify the surety. This means that the principal debtor implicitly commits to reimbursing the surety for any sums that the surety rightfully pays under the guarantee. However, the principal debtor is not responsible for repaying any sums that the surety pays wrongfully.

Example:

Let's consider an example to illustrate this concept:

  • B owes a debt to C, and A acts as the surety for this debt. When C demands payment from A, and A refuses to pay, C takes legal action against A for the amount owed. A decides to defend the lawsuit, as he has valid reasons for doing so. However, due to legal proceedings, A is eventually compelled to pay the entire debt along with the associated costs.

In this scenario, A is entitled to recover from B not only the principal debt but also the amount he paid for the legal costs. This is because the implied promise by the principal debtor (B) to indemnify the surety (A) allows A to seek reimbursement for sums paid rightfully under the guarantee, which includes the costs incurred during the legal defense.

Bailment and Pledge

Chapter IX of the Act is dedicated to the legal concepts of bailment and pledge.

Bailment Section 148 provides the definition of 'bailment' as the act of delivering goods from one person to another for a specific purpose, under a contract that dictates they must be returned or dealt with according to the directions of the person making the delivery. Bailment involves two key parties:

  • Bailor: The person delivering the goods, known as the 'bailor.'
  • Bailee: The recipient of the goods, known as the 'bailee.'

It's worth noting that when a person already has possession of someone else's goods and agrees to hold them as a bailee, the owner becomes the bailor, and the possessor becomes the bailee. This transformation into a bailment occurs even if the goods were not initially delivered for that specific purpose.

For a situation to qualify as a bailment, several conditions must be met:

  • There must be a specific delivery of goods from one person to another.
  • The delivery must be made for a particular purpose.
  • The delivery must be subject to a contract specifying that the goods will be returned or dealt with according to the bailor's instructions.

Bailments can be categorized as either voluntary or involuntary. Voluntary bailments arise from an explicit agreement between the parties. In contrast, involuntary bailments occur in cases involving found goods, goods sent to the wrong location, an excess of ordered goods, or situations where the bailee passes away, and the subject of the bailment ends up with the bailee's heirs.

If there is no obligation to return the identical article, whether in its original form or altered, a bailment contract does not exist.

Pledge Section 172 of the Indian Contract Act deals with the concept of pledge. A pledge is a special kind of bailment in which goods are delivered to the bailee (pledgee) as security for a debt or performance of a promise. The essential elements of a pledge include:

  • The delivery of goods for the purpose of creating security.
  • The existence of a debt or promise.
  • The understanding that upon fulfillment of the debt or promise, the goods will be returned to the pledgor.

In a pledge, the pledgor retains ownership of the goods while the pledgee holds possession of them as security. If the pledgor fails to meet their obligation, the pledgee has the right to sell the goods to recover the debt or enforce the promise.

Get Details: note-making tips suggested by the judiciary exam toppers 

Delivery to Bailee: How It Occurs

Section 149 outlines that the delivery to the bailee can be achieved by any action that results in the goods coming under the possession of the intended bailee or any individuals authorized to hold the goods on behalf of the bailee.

Duties of the Bailor

Section 150 specifies three duties of the bailor as follows:

  • The bailor is obligated to disclose to the bailee any faults in the goods that the bailor is aware of and that significantly affect their use or expose the bailee to unusual risks.
  • In cases where the bailor fails to make such disclosures and this omission results in loss or damage, the bailor is responsible for the portion of the loss or damage that directly results from these faults.
  • If the goods are bailed in exchange for payment, the bailor is responsible for any damage directly arising from these faults, whether or not the bailor was aware of their existence in the goods being bailed.

Responsibilities of the Bailee

Section 151 stipulates that in all instances of bailment, the bailee is obligated to exercise the same level of care for the bailed goods as a reasonable person would for their own goods of comparable volume, quality, and value under similar circumstances.

In the case of 'Nagalinga Chettiyar V. Kayarebana Chettiyar' – AIR 1915 Mad.80, it was established that failing to meet the standard of care outlined in Section 151 does not absolve the bailee from liability, even if the bailee's own goods were lost concurrently with the bailed goods.

In 'Sirmour Truck Operators Union V. National Insurance Co. Limited' – AIR 2011 (NOC) 389 (HP), it was ruled that a carrier cannot escape liability for losses resulting from their own negligence or negligence by their agent when goods are transported under the 'owner’s risk' condition.

Exemption from Liability for Bailee

Section 152 states that, in the absence of a specific agreement, the bailee is not responsible for the loss, destruction, or deterioration of the bailed item if the bailee has exercised the level of care described in Section 151.

Termination of Bailment

Section 153 provides that a bailment contract can be voided at the discretion of the bailor if the bailee performs any action regarding the bailed goods that contradicts the terms of the bailment.

Responsibility for Unapproved Use of Bailed Goods

As per Section 154, if the bailee employs the bailed goods in a manner inconsistent with the terms of the bailment, the bailee is accountable for reimbursing the bailor for any harm incurred by the goods as a result of such utilization.

Bailee's Responsibility for Delayed Return and Accrued Benefits

Section 161 stipulates that if, due to the bailee's default, the goods are not returned, delivered, or tendered in a timely manner, the bailee becomes liable to the bailor for any loss, destruction, or deterioration of the goods from that point onward.

Section 163 outlines that unless there is a contractual agreement to the contrary, the bailee is obligated to hand over to the bailor, or in accordance with the bailor's instructions, any gains or profits that may have arisen from the bailed goods during the bailment period.

Delivery to One Joint Owner and Bailment without Title

Section 165 stipulates that when several joint owners of goods enter into a bailment agreement, the bailee is allowed to return the goods to, or in accordance with the instructions of, a single joint owner without requiring the consent of all owners unless there is an explicit agreement stating otherwise.

Section 166 establishes that if the bailor lacks legal title to the goods, and the bailee, in good faith, returns them to the bailor or as per the bailor's directions, the bailee is not liable to the true owner for such delivery.

Termination of Gratuitous Bailment due to Death and Third-Party Rights

Section 162 specifies that a gratuitous bailment comes to an end upon the death of either the bailor or the bailee.

Section 167 grants the right to a third party, aside from the bailor, who claims ownership of the bailed goods, to apply to the Court to prevent the delivery of the goods to the bailor and resolve the dispute regarding the title to the goods.

Rights and Responsibilities of Finder of Goods

Section 168 clarifies that a person who finds goods has no legal right to sue the owner for compensation related to expenses and efforts voluntarily incurred to preserve the goods and locate the owner. However, the finder may retain the goods until receiving such compensation. Additionally, if the owner has offered a specific reward for the return of the lost goods, the finder has the right to sue for that reward and can hold onto the goods until receiving it.

Sale of Lost Goods by the Finder

Section 169 outlines the circumstances under which a finder of goods may sell them. If the owner cannot be reasonably found or refuses to pay the lawful charges of the finder upon demand, the finder can sell the goods under the following conditions:

  1. When the goods are in danger of perishing or losing a significant portion of their value.
  2. When the lawful charges of the finder for the found goods amount to two-thirds of their value.

The sale can be conducted by the owner, an agent with the owner's consent, or someone with the authority to do so. The finder of the assets can also sell them and pass good title, and there may be a sale by estoppel.

Bailee's Right to Lien

Section 170 states that when a bailee has provided a service involving labor or skill to the goods bailed, in accordance with the purpose of the bailment, they have the right to retain those goods until they receive proper remuneration for the services rendered. This right exists unless there is a contract specifying otherwise.

Pledge and its Definition

Section 172 defines 'pledge' as the bailment of movable property as security for the payment of a debt or the performance of a promise. This arrangement involves two parties:

  • 'Pawner': The person delivering the property as security is referred to as the pawner.
  • 'Pawnee': The person receiving the property as security is known as the pawnee.

Pledge is a specific form of bailment used for securing debt or fulfilling a promise. It involves the possession of movable property being transferred to the pawnee as security. This concept is elaborated upon in Sections 172 to 179 of the Act. In a pledge, the pawnee possesses and has a special property interest in the goods, which can be retained to ensure repayment. Unlike a mortgage, a pledge does not transfer any ownership interest in the property to the pawnee, and the delivery of the goods is essential to complete the pledge.

Rights of the Pawnee

The rights of the pawnee are elaborated in Section 173, 175, and 176. According to Section 173, the pawnee has the authority to retain the goods pledged, not solely for the repayment of the debt or the fulfillment of the promise, but also for the interest on the debt and all essential expenses incurred for the possession and preservation of the pledged goods.

Section 175 stipulates that the pawnee is entitled to receive from the pawnor any extraordinary expenses incurred for preserving the pledged goods.

Section 176 details the actions a pawnee can take if the pawnor defaults in repaying the debt or fulfilling the promise. The pawnee can initiate legal action against the pawnor for the debt or promise and retain the pledged goods as collateral security. Alternatively, the pawnee may sell the pledged items, providing the pawnor with reasonable notice of the sale. If the proceeds from the sale are less than the amount due for the debt or promise, the pawnor remains liable for the balance. Conversely, if the sale generates more than the debt or promise amount, the pawnee must refund the surplus to the pawnor.

Retaining Goods by the Pawnee

Section 174 emphasizes that, unless there is a specific contract stating otherwise, the pawnee cannot retain the pledged goods for any debt or promise other than the one for which they were pledged. However, such a contract is presumed to be in place concerning subsequent advances made by the pawnee unless stated otherwise.

Download now: Judiciary Examination Question Papers 

Pledge by Mercantile Agent

Section 178 deals with pledges made by a mercantile agent who, with the owner's consent, is in possession of goods or their title documents. In such cases, any pledge made by the agent while acting in the ordinary course of mercantile business is considered valid, as if explicitly authorized by the owner of the goods. This is valid provided that the pawnee acts in good faith and is unaware at the time of pledging that the pawnor lacks the authority to pledge.

A 'mercantile agent' is defined under Section 2(2) of the Sale of Goods Act as an agent authorized, in the course of ordinary business, to sell goods, consign goods for sale, buy goods, or raise money with goods as security.

Pledge in a Voidable Contract

Section 178A specifies that when the pawnor has possession of the goods pledged under a contract that is voidable under Section 19 or Section 19A, and the contract has not been rescinded at the time of pledging, the pawnee acquires a valid title to the goods. This is contingent upon the pawnee acting in good faith and without knowledge of any defects in the pawnor's title.

Limited Interest of the Pawnor

Section 179 explains that when an individual pledges goods in which they possess only a limited interest, the pledge is valid only to the extent of that limited interest.

Suit Against Wrongdoers

Section 180 outlines the rights of the bailee if a third party wrongfully interferes with the possession or use of the goods bailed or causes harm to them. In such cases, the bailee can seek remedies that the owner might have pursued if no bailment had been established. Either the bailor or the bailee can file a lawsuit against the third party for such interference or damage.

Apportionment of Relief

Section 181 states that any relief or compensation obtained in such a lawsuit must be distributed according to the respective interests of the bailor and bailee.

Agency: Chapter X of the Act is dedicated to the subject of Agency.

Definition of Agent Section 182 of the Act establishes that an 'agent' is an individual employed to perform tasks on behalf of another or to represent another person in transactions with third parties.

Principal The person for whom these actions are performed or who is being represented is referred to as the 'principal.'

Agent Eligibility Certain provisions regarding agents are as follows:

  • An individual may serve as an agent if they have reached the age of majority according to the relevant law.
  • They must be of sound mind.
  • The appointment of an agent does not require any consideration.
  • An agent's authority can be either expressed or implied.

Definition of Expressed and Implied Authority Section 187 outlines the definitions of 'expressed authority' and 'implied authority.' Expressed authority is granted through spoken or written words, while implied authority is inferred from the circumstances surrounding the case. These circumstances can include spoken or written communications and customary business practices.

Example For instance, if A owns a shop in Serampur but resides in Calcutta and occasionally visits the shop, and the shop is managed by B, who frequently orders goods from C in A's name for the shop's purposes and pays for them using A's funds, B has implied authority from A to make these orders in A's name for the shop.

Agent's Eligibility Section 184 states that, for matters related to the principal and third parties, any person may become an agent. However, individuals who have not reached the age of majority and those lacking mental capacity cannot become agents and assume responsibilities according to the law.

Consideration for Agency Section 185 clarifies that no consideration is required to establish an agency relationship.

Authority of the Agent Section 188 defines the extent of an agent's authority. If an agent is authorized to perform an action, they also have the authority to carry out any lawful activities necessary to accomplish that action. Similarly, an agent with authority to conduct a business has the authority to perform all lawful tasks required for that business's operation, as well as those typically performed in the course of running such a business.

Agent's Authority and Sub-Agents

Section 190 addresses the agent's authority to delegate responsibilities. An agent cannot legally appoint another person to perform tasks that the agent has explicitly or implicitly agreed to carry out personally, unless it is customary in a particular trade for a sub-agent to be engaged, or the nature of the agency necessitates the use of a sub-agent.

Definition of Sub-Agent Section 191 defines a 'sub-agent' as an individual employed by and acting under the supervision of the original agent within the scope of the agency's business.

Role of the Sub-Agent Section 192 establishes that when a sub-agent is properly appointed, the principal, in relation to third parties, is represented by the sub-agent. The principal is bound by and accountable for the sub-agent's actions as if the sub-agent were initially appointed by the principal.

The agent is responsible to the principal for the actions of the sub-agent. The sub-agent is accountable to the agent but not to the principal, except in cases involving fraud or deliberate wrongdoing.

Agent's Responsibility for Unauthorized Sub-Agents Section 193 outlines the agent's liability when they appoint a sub-agent without proper authorization. If an agent, without the necessary authority, appoints a person to act as a sub-agent, the agent assumes a role similar to that of a principal with respect to the person they employed as a sub-agent. The agent is responsible for the actions of this individual both to the principal and to third parties. The principal is not represented by, or responsible for, the actions of the improperly appointed sub-agent, and the sub-agent is not liable to the principal.

Authority to Name Another Person Section 194 specifies that when an agent, who possesses express or implied authority to designate another person to act on behalf of the principal in the agency's business, appoints such an individual, that person is not considered a sub-agent. Instead, they become an agent of the principal for the part of the agency's business entrusted to them.

Duties of an Agent

Section 195 outlines the duties of an agent in selecting another individual to act on behalf of their principal. An agent is obligated to exercise the same level of prudence and discretion that a reasonable person would employ in their own affairs when choosing an agent for their principal. If the agent fulfills this duty, they are not held accountable to the principal for the actions or negligence of the agent they have selected.

Examples: (a) Suppose A instructs B, a merchant, to purchase a ship on A's behalf. B, in turn, hires a reputable ship surveyor to make the ship selection for A. However, the surveyor's choice proves to be negligent, resulting in the selection of an unseaworthy ship that is subsequently lost. In this case, B is not liable to A for the choice of the ship, but the surveyor is responsible for the consequences.

(b) Consider a situation where A consigns goods to B, a merchant, for the purpose of selling them. B then engages a reputable auctioneer to sell A's goods and allows the auctioneer to collect the sale proceeds. However, the auctioneer later becomes insolvent without accounting for the proceeds. In this scenario, B is not held responsible to A for the missing proceeds.

Ratification Section 196 addresses the rights of a person concerning acts performed on their behalf without their knowledge or authorization. When actions are carried out by one person on behalf of another, but without the latter's awareness or consent, the person for whom the acts were performed has the option to either ratify or disavow those actions. If they choose to ratify them, the same legal consequences will ensue as if the acts had been executed with their explicit authority.

Read aboutMP Civil Judge Examination Preparation

Termination of Agency

Section 201 outlines the circumstances under which an agency can be terminated. An agency may be terminated by the principal in the following ways:

  • By revoking the agent's authority.
  • By the agent renouncing their role in the agency.
  • When the business or purpose for which the agency was established is completed.
  • In the event of the death or unsoundness of mind of either the principal or the agent.
  • When the principal is declared insolvent under the provisions of any applicable law for dealing with insolvent debtors.

Protection of Agent's Interest

Section 202 provides protection for the agent's interest in cases where the agent has a personal stake or interest in the property that is the subject of the agency. In such situations, the agency cannot be terminated to the detriment of the agent's interest, unless there is an explicit contract stating otherwise.

Compensation

Section 205 deals with compensation in cases of revocation by the principal or renunciation by the agent. When there is an explicit or implicit agreement that the agency will continue for a specified period, the principal must compensate the agent or vice versa if the agency is revoked or renounced without sufficient cause.

Notice of Revocation

Section 206 stipulates that reasonable notice must be provided before revocation or renunciation of the agency. Failure to provide such notice may result in the responsible party compensating the other party for any resulting damage.

Express or Implied Revocation/Renunciation

Section 207 clarifies that revocation or renunciation can be either explicitly stated or implied through the conduct of the principal or agent, respectively.

Termination of Sub-agent's Authority

Section 210 states that the termination of the authority of an agent also leads to the termination of the authority of all sub-agents appointed by that agent.

Agent's Duty

Section 211 outlines the obligations of an agent. An agent is obligated to conduct the business of the principal in accordance with the principal's instructions. In the absence of specific instructions, the agent must follow the customary practices for similar businesses in the locality where the agent conducts business on behalf of the principal. Any deviation from these guidelines that results in losses must be compensated by the agent to the principal, and any profits generated must be accounted for and surrendered to the principal.

Rights of the Principal

The rights of the principal are delineated in Sections 215 and 216.

  • Section 215 stipulates that if an agent conducts business on their own behalf within the scope of the agency without obtaining prior consent from the principal and without disclosing all relevant information that they are aware of regarding the matter, the principal has the option to disavow the transaction. This is applicable in cases where it becomes evident that either essential facts were deliberately withheld from the principal by the agent or the agent's actions have proven detrimental to the principal.
  • Section 216 states that if an agent, without informing their principal, engages in business related to the agency for their own benefit rather than on behalf of the principal, the principal has the right to demand from the agent any gains or advantages that may have accrued to the agent through that transaction.

Rights of the Agent

The rights of agents are defined in Sections 217 and 219.

  • Section 217: An agent has the right to retain, from any sums received on behalf of the principal in the course of agency business, all monies owed to the agent for advances made or legitimate expenses incurred during the conduct of such business. The agent is also entitled to the remuneration due for acting as an agent.
  • Section 218: After deducting the aforementioned amounts, the agent is obligated to remit to the principal all sums received on the principal's behalf.
  • Section 219: Unless specified otherwise in a contract, payment for the execution of any act is not owed to the agent until the completion of that act. However, an agent can withhold funds received on account of goods sold, even if not all the consigned goods have been sold or if the sale is not yet finalized.

Misconduct of the Agent

Section 220 states that an agent who engages in misconduct during the agency's operations is not entitled to any remuneration for the part of the business affected by such misconduct.

Read More: English preparation for Judiciary Exams.

Agent’s Right of Retention

Section 221 establishes that unless there is a specific contract stating otherwise, an agent has the right to withhold goods, documents, and any other property, whether movable or immovable, received from the principal until the agent's outstanding dues for commission, expenses, and services related to these items have been settled or accounted for.

Principal's Responsibility to the Agent

According to Section 222, the principal who employs an agent is obligated to indemnify the agent against any legal consequences arising from the agent's lawful actions carried out within the scope of the authority granted by the principal.

Agency with Third Parties

Section 226 addresses the enforcement and consequences of contracts made through agents. Contracts entered into via an agent and obligations resulting from actions performed by an agent can be enforced in the same manner and have the same legal implications as if these contracts were made and actions were taken by the principal in person.

Examples: (a) If A purchases goods from B, knowing that B is an agent for selling them but unaware of the principal's identity, the principal is entitled to demand the price of the goods from A. A cannot use a debt owed to him by B as a setoff in a lawsuit brought by the principal. (b) When A, acting as B's agent with the authority to collect money on B's behalf, receives a sum of money from C that is owed to B, C is relieved of the obligation to pay that sum to B.

Section 227 stipulates that when an agent exceeds their authorized powers, and it is possible to separate the actions within their authority from those beyond their authority, only the part of their actions within their authority is binding in the relationship between the agent and the principal.

Notice to the Agent

Section 229 specifies that any notice given to or information acquired by the agent, as long as it is provided or obtained during the course of the business conducted by the agent on behalf of the principal, shall, in the relationship between the principal and third parties, carry the same legal implications as if it had been given to or acquired by the principal directly.

Enforcement of Contracts by Agent on Behalf of Principal

Section 230 stipulates that unless there is an explicit contract stating otherwise, an agent cannot personally pursue the enforcement of contracts that he has entered into on behalf of his principal, nor is he personally obligated by them. However, such a contract implying personal responsibility for the agent will be assumed in the following situations:

  1. When the contract is made by an agent for the sale or purchase of goods on behalf of a merchant residing in another country.
  2. When the agent refrains from disclosing the name of his principal.
  3. When the principal, even if disclosed, cannot be subject to a lawsuit.

Rights of Parties in Contracts Made by Undisclosed Agents

Section 231 outlines the rights of parties involved in a contract made by an undisclosed agent. If an agent enters into a contract with a person who is unaware, and has no reason to suspect, that the agent is acting on behalf of a principal, the principal can demand the fulfillment of the contract. However, the other party to the contract retains the same rights against the principal as they would have had against the agent if the agent had been the principal.

If the principal reveals their identity before the contract is finalized, the other contracting party can refuse to fulfill the contract if they can demonstrate that had they known the true identity of the principal or that the agent was not the principal, they would not have entered into the contract.

Section 232 further specifies that when one person contracts with another, both parties being unaware, and having no reasonable grounds to suspect, that the other is acting as an agent, the principal can only enforce the contract subject to the rights and obligations that exist between the agent and the other party to the contract.

Liability of a Falsely Represented Agent

Section 235 addresses the liability of an individual who falsely represents themselves as the authorized agent of another, leading a third party to engage with them under this false pretense. If the alleged employer (the true principal) does not later confirm or ratify these actions, the person who pretended to be the agent is responsible for compensating the third party for any losses or damages incurred as a result of the dealings based on this misrepresentation.

Section 236 specifies that an individual who enters into a contract while assuming the role of an agent cannot demand the contract's performance if, in reality, they were not acting as an agent but on their own behalf.

Section 237 states that when an agent, without proper authorization, carries out actions or enters into obligations with third parties on behalf of their principal, the principal becomes legally bound by these actions or obligations if, through their words or behavior, they have led these third parties to believe that such actions and obligations were within the scope of the agent's authority.

Prepare with: Best judiciary online coaching.

Questions for practice of Indian Contract Act for Judiciary Preparation

1. Which one of the following is not a quasi contract?

(a) Claim for necessaries supplied to person incapable of contracting, or on his account;

(b) Reimbursement of persons paying money by another, in payment of which he is interested;

(c) Uncertainty and futurity of the event to which it is related;

(d) Responsibility of finder of goods.

2. The breach of contract may be-

(a) Actual;

(b) Anticipatory;

(c) None of the above;

(d) Either of the above

3. Which one of the following is not the feature of the contract of guarantee?

(a) There are two parties in this contract;

(b) The liability of surety is secondary;

(c) There is an existing debt for which the surety gives guarantee to the creditor on behalf of the principal debtor;

(d) The surety gives contract at the request of the principal debtor

4. A person may not become an agent-

(a) If he is of the age of maturity;

(b) If he is of unsound mind;

(c) Either of the above;

(d) None of the above.

5. Which one of the following is not a contract?

(a) A find B’s purse and gives it to him. B promises to give him `1,000/-;

(b) A promises, for no consideration, to give `10,000/-;

(c) A agrees to sell a horse worth of `1,000/- for `10/-;

(d) A supports B’s infant son. B promises to pay A’s expenses in so doing.

6. Which one of the following is not a lawful object?

(a) A promises to obtain for B an employment in the public service and B promises to pay ` 2 lakhs to A;

(b) A agrees to sell his house to B for `25 lakhs for which B agrees;

(c) A promises to maintain B’s child and B promises to pay `5,000/- per month;

(d) A promises to pay `1 lakh at the end of six months if C who owes that sum to B fails to pay. B promises to grant time to C accordingly.

Conclusion:

The Indian Contract Act, 1872, forms the basis for contract law in India, and its provisions continue to be applied in various business and personal transactions. A Judiciary aspirant should make their own notes and for that you can refer to the notes on this blog.

  1. refer to all the important sections  mentioned in this article.
  2. Make your own notes after reading this article thoroughly.
  3. Make sure you read properly from the Bare Acts as well to get complete knowledge about the Indian Contrat Act.
  4. For judiciary preparation refer to the Previous Year Papers to know the trends.
  5. You must practice all the previous year papers for Prelims and Mains both to test your complete knowledge.

All the best Judiciary Aspirants.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which are the best books for the preparation of Indian Contract Act?

Is bare Acts knowledge enough for Judicial Services Exams?

Can I Prepare for Indian Contract Act in 3 months?

What are the important bare acts for judiciary exams?

How are Previous year question papers useful in preparing for the Indian Contract Act?

ABOUT TOP RANKERS

Toprankers, launched in 2016, is India’s most preferred digital counselling & preparation platform for careers beyond engineering & medicine. We envision to build awareness and increase the success rate for lucrative career options after 12th. We offer best learning practices and end-to-end support to every student preparing for management, humanities, law, judiciary & design entrances.

E

: support@toprankers.com

P

: +91-7676564400

Social Channels

App Badge

Chat to Toprankers Team