PVR

Law Of Contracts I
Semester II - Spring ‘23

1. Introduction & Offer

Invitation to Make Offer/Invitation to Treat
1. Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd., [1952] 2 QB 795
2. McPherson v. Appana, AIR 1951 SC 184
Revocation of Offer
1. Dickinson v. Dodds [1876] 2ChD 463
Advertisements as Offers
1. Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., [1893] 1 QB 256
2. Lefkowitz v Great Minneapolis Surplus Store Inc (1957) 86 NW 2d 689
3. Leonard v. Pepsico, 88 F. Supp. 2d (1999)

2. Acceptance
Acceptance
1. Harvey v. Facey, [1893] 3 App. Cas. 459
How To Accept
1. Butler Machine Tool Co. Ltd. v. Ex-Cell-O Corpn (England) Ltd., (1979) 1 WLR 401 CA
How To Accept: Acceptance By Conduct
1. Brodgen v Metropolitan Railway [1877] 2 App Cas 666
2. Pro CD v Zeidenberg, 86 F. 3d 1447 (7th Cir. 1996)
Acceptance in Ignorance of offer
1. R V Clarke (1927) 40 CLR 227 (Australia)
Communication of Acceptance and Moment of Contract Formation
1. Adams v Lindsell, (1818) 1 B & Ald. 681 [Communication of Acceptance]
2. Entores v. Miles Far East Corporation, [1955] 2 QB
3. Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. Girdharilal Parshottamdas & Co., AIR 1966 SC 543
4. Hyde v Wrench, (1840) 3 Beav. 334
5. Felthouse v Bindley, (1862) 11 CBNS 869

3. Consideration
Pinnel’s Rule
1. Pinnel v Cole (1602) 5 Co Rep 117
2. Fokes v Beer (1884) 9 App Cas 605
Pre-existing duty rule
1. Stilk v Myrick (1809)2 Camp 317
1
 PVR

2. Williams V Roffey Brothers [1991] 1 QB 1

3. Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt, (1913) 11 ALJ 489
Firm Offer Rule
1. Bank of India v O P Swarankar (2003) 2 SCC 721 (Supreme Court of India)
2. Somasundaram Pillai v Provincial Government of Madras [1947] AIR Madras 366 (Madras High Court)
Past Consideration & its limits
1. Lampleigh v. Brathwaite [1615] Hob 105.
2. Eastwood v. Kenyon (1840) 11 Ad & El 438.
Consideration cannot be Illusory
1. White v Bluett (1853) 23 LJ Ex 36
2. Hamer v Sidway (1891) 124 NY 538 (American Case to be contrasted from White)
Adequacy of Consideration
1. Chappel & Co V Nestle [1960 AC] 87
Promissory Estoppel
1. Hughes v. Metropolitan Railway Co., (1877) 2 App. Cas. 439 [Promissory Estoppel]
2. Central London Property Trust V High Trees House Ltd [1947] 1 KB 130
3. Kedarnath Bhattacharji v. Gorie Mahomed. (1866) ILR 14 Calcutta 64
4. Doraswami Iyer v. Arunachala Ayyar, AIR 1936 Mad 135
5. M.P. Sugar Mills v. State of U.P., AIR 1979 SC 621

4. Intention to Create Legal Relations

5. Balfour V Balfour [1919] 2 KB 571
6. Lucy v. Zehmer, 84 S.E.2d 516

7. Privity
8. Bourne v Mason (1669) 1 Ventr 6, 86 ER 5
9. Dutton v Poole (1678) 2 Lev 211
10. Tweddle v Atkinson, [1861] 1 B & S 393
11. Dunlop Pnuematic Tyre Company V Selfridge Co [1915] AC 79
12. Chinnaya v. Venkataramaya (1881) ILR 4 Madras 137
13. Debnarayan Dutt vs Chunilal Ghose (1914) ILR 41 Cal 137
14. Khirodbehari Dutt v Mangobinda AIR 1934 Cal 682
15. Kepong Prospecting Ltd v Schmidt [1968] AC 810
16. Iswaram Pillai v Sonivaveru Taragan 61[1914] AIR Mad 701
17. Krishna Lal Sadhu and Anr. vs Pramila Bala Dassi 114 Ind Cas 658
18. The National Petroleum Company vs Popatlal Mulji (1936) 38 BOMLR 610, 165 Ind Cas 338
19. M.C.Chacko v. The State Bank of Travancore (1969) 2 SCC 343
Exceptions to Privity
Early Exception on Grounds of Love and Affection
1. Dutton v Poole (1678) 2 Lev 211
2
 PVR

2. Family Arrangements (India)

3. Nawab Khwaja Muhammad Khan v. Nawab Husaini Begam (1910) 37 I.A. 152
Covenants Running with Land
1. Renals v Cowlishaw (1879) 11 Ch D 866
2. Rogers v Hosegood [1900] 2 Ch 388
3. Rambriksh Prasad vs Shyamsunder Prasad Sahu And Ors AIR 1958 Pat 467
Trust
1. Les Affréteurs v Walford [1919] AC 801
2. Re Schebsman [1944] Ch 83
3. N. Devaraje Urs vs M. Ramakrishniah AIR 1952 Kant 109, AIR 1952 Mys 109
Assignment
1. Tolhurst v. Associated Portland Cement Manufacturers Ltd [1902] 2 KB 660 Trendtex Trading
Corporation v. Credit Suisse [1982] AC 679
2. Dawson v. Great Northern & City Railway Co [1905] 1 KB 260
Agency
1. Wakefield v. Duckworth [1915] 1 KB 218
2. Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge & Co Ltd

20. Capacity
General Rule
1. Mohori Bibee v. Dhuromdas Ghose, 1903 30 IA 114
2. Raj Rani v. Prem Adib AIR 1949 Bom 215
3. Mathai v. Joseph Mary (2015) 5 SCC 622
4. Nash v. Inman, [1908] 2 KB 1
Circumventing the General Rule
1. A.T. Raghava Chariar v. O.A Srinivasa (1916 ) 31MLJ 575
2. Fernandez v. Gonsalves AIR 1925 Bom 97
3. Gadigappa Bhimappa v. Balangowda, AIR 1931 Bom. 561 (FB)
4. Ajudhia Prasad v. Chandan Lal, AIR 1937 All. 610

21. Consent
Coercion, Undue Influence, and Unconscionability
Threat of self-harm and coercion
1. Chikham Amiraju v. Chikham Sesamma, 1917 41 Mad. 33
Threat of criminal prosecution and coercion
1. Williams v Bayley (1866) LR 1 HL 200
2. Askari Mirza v. Bibi Jai Kishori, 1912 16 IC 344
Economic Duress
1. Universe Tankships Inc of Monrovia v International Transport Workers’ Federation [1982] 2 All ER 67
2. Atlas Express Ltd. v Kafco [1989] 1 QB 833
3
 PVR

3. Daiichi Karkaria v ONGC AIR 1992 Bom 309

4. Kishan Lal v NMDC AIR 2001 Delhi 402
Undue Influence
1. Allcard v Skinner (1887) 36 Ch D 145
2. Subhash Chandra Mushib v. Ganda Prasad Mushib, AIR 1967 SC 878
Unconscionability
1. Central Inland Water Transportation Ltd. v. Brojo Nath Ganguly, AIR 1986 SC 1571
2. Pioneer Urban Land and Infrastructure Ltd. v Govindan Raghavan [2019] 5 SCC 725
‘Inequality of bargaining power doctrine’
1. Lloyds Bank v. Bundy, [1975] 1 QB 326 (close analysis of the judgment of Lord Denning)

Fraud and Misrepresentation

Fraud
1. Vokes v. Arthur Murray, 212 So. 2d 1906 (1968)
Misrepresentation
1. Bhagwani Bai v. LIC, Jabalpur, AIR 1984 MP 126
2. Esso Petroleum v Mardon, [1976] QB 801
Mistake
1. Tarsem Singh v. Sukhminder Singh, 1998 3 SCC 471
---
1. Derry v. Peek, 1899 14 App Cas 337 [Fraud]
2. Ramesh Kumar v. Furu Ram, 2011 8 SCC 613 [Fraud]
3. Bisset v Wilkinson, [1927] AC 177 [Misrepresentation]
4. Union of India v. Benode Kumar, AIR 1926 Cal 48 [Misrepresentation] K.R. Raghavan v. Union of India,
Delhi High Court, May 4, 1979 [Misrepresentation]
5. Cundy v Lindsay, (1878) 3 App. Cas. 459 [Mistake]
6. Bell v Lever Brothers, [1932] AC 161 [Mistake]
7. Smith v Hughes, (1871) LR 6 QB [Mistake]
8. Couturier v Hastie, (1856) 5 HLC 673 [Mistake]
9. King’s Norton Metal Co. Ltd v Edridge, Merrett & Co Ltd, (1897) 14 TLR 98 [Mistake]
10. Philips v Brooks Ltd., [1919] 2 KB 243 [Mistake]
11. Raghunath Prasad v. Sarju Prasad, 1923 51 I.A. 101 [Undue Influence] Redgrave v. Hurd, (1881) 20 Ch D

22. Legality And Contingent Contracts

23. Niranjan Shankar Golikari v. Century Spinning & Manufacturing Co. Ltd., AIR 1967 SC 1098
24. Percept D’Markr v. Zaheer Khan, (2006) 4 SCC 277
--
25. Patel v Mirza [2016] UKSC 42[restatement of the principle of ex turpi causa]
26. BOI Finance Ltd. v. Custodian and Ors., AIR 1997 SC 1952

4
 PVR

27. Discharge
Attempted performance
1. Cutter v Powell, (1795) 101 ER 573

Illegality (subsequent) of Performance

1. Metropolitan Water Board v Dick Kerr and Co Ltd [1918] AC 119
2. Fibrosa Spolka Akcyjna v Fairbairn Lawson Combe Barbour Ltd [1942] UKHL 4

Impossibility of performance
1. Taylor v. Caldwell, QB (1863) 3 B & S: 122 ER 309 Howell v Coupland (1876) 1 QBD 258
2. Bank Line Ltd v Arthur Capel & Co [(1919) A.C. 435]

Frustration of object or purpose

1. Jackson v Union Marine Insurance (1874) LR10CP 125
2. Krell v Henry [1903] 2 KB 740
3. Hernebay Steam Navigation Co. v Hutton [1903] 2 KB 683
4. Davis v Fareham Urban District Council [1956] AC 696
5. Tsakiroglou v Noblee Thorl [1962] AC 93
6. Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur, 1954 SCR 310
7. Energy Watchdog v. CERC, 2017 SCC Online SC 378

Frustration and Contingent Contract

1. Ramzan v. Hussaini, AIR 1990 SC 529
2. Ganga Saran v. Firm Ram Charan Ram Gopal, AIR 1952 SC 9

Discharge by agreement: Novation

1. Ram Khilona & Ors. v. Sardar & Ors., AIR 2002 SC 2548

Discharge by agreement: Alteration

1. Kalianna Gounder v. Palani Gounder, (1970) 2 SCR 455
2. M. Sham Singh v. State of Mysore, AIR 1972 SC 2440

Discharge by agreement: Accord and Satisfaction

1. Kapur Chand Godha vs. Mir Nawab Himayatali Khan, (1963 AIR 250/ 1963 SCR (2) 168)

Discharge by breach
1. Murlidhar Chatterjee v. International Film Co., AIR 1943 PC 34

Anticipatory breach

5
 PVR

1. Hochster v De La Tour, (1853) 2 E & B 678

Discharge of joint liabilities

1. Devilal v. Himat Ram, AIR 1973 Raj. 39
---
1. Krishna and Co. v. The Government of A.P. & Ors., AIR 1993 AP 1 (Frustration of Object)
2. Re Moore & Co. Ltd v. Landauer & Co., [1921] 2 KB 519 (Actual Performance)
3. Shipton, Anderson & Co v Weil Bros & Co., [1912] I KB 574 (Actual Performance)
4. Ralli Bros. v. Compania Nautera, (1920) 2 K.B. 287
5. Rash Behary Shaha v. Nrittya Gopal Nundy, (1906) ILR 33 Cal 477 (Anticipatory Breach)
6. V.L. Narasu v. Iyer, ILR [1953] Mad. 831
7. Wasoo Enterprises v. J.J. Oil Mills, AIR 1968 Guj. 57 (Time of Performance)

28. Remedies- Damages and Specific Relief

Damages
Measure of damages
1. Robinson v Harman (1848) 154 ER 363.
2. Murlidhar Chiranjilal v. Dwarkadas, [1962] 1 SCR 653
3. Remoteness of damage
4. Hadley v. Baxendale (1854), 9 Ex 341
5. Transfield Shipping Inc v Mercator Shipping Inc [2008] UKHL 48
6. Karsandas H. Thacker v M/s The Saran Engineering Co. Ltd AIR 1965 SC 1981
7. Pannalal Jankidas v. Mohanlal, AIR 1951 SC 144
Cost of Cure
1. Ruxley Electronics and Constructions Ltd v Forsyth [1996] AC 344.
2. Nikhera v Chitnavis AIR 1941 Nag 111.
Duty to Mitigate
1. M. Lachia Setty v. The Coffee Board, Bangalore AIR 1981 SC 162.
Frustration of object or purpose
1. Jackson v Union Marine Insurance (1874) LR10CP 125
2. Krell v Henry [1903] 2 KB 740
3. Hernebay Steam Navigation Co. v Hutton [1903] 2 KB 683
4. Davis v Fareham Urban District Council [1956] AC 696
5. Tsakiroglou v Noblee Thorl [1962] AC 93
6. Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur, 1954 SCR 310
7. Energy Watchdog v. CERC, 2017 SCC Online SC 378

Stipulated Sums: Liquidated Damages and Penalties

1. Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage & Motor Co Ltd, (1915) AC 79 (Lord Dunedin’s opinion)
6
 PVR

2. Cavendish Square Holdings v Talal El Makdessi [2015] UKSC 67

3. Fatehchand v Balkishan Das [1964] 1 SCR 515
4. Maula Bux v Union of India [1969] 2 SCC 554
5. ONGC v. Saw Pipes [2003] 5 SCC 705
---
1. Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd [1949] 2 KB 528
2. C Czarnikow Ltd v Koufos [1967] UKHL 4
3. Anglia Television Ltd. v. Reed, [1971] 3 All E. R. 690
4. Sylvia Shipping Co Limited v Progress Bulk Carriers Limited [2010] EWHC 542
5. Kailash Nath Associates v Delhi Development Authority [2015] 4 SCC 136
6. Jamaal v. Moola Dawood, (1916) ILR 43 Cal 493

Adequacy of Damages (The general limitation)

1. Beswick v. Beswick [1968] AC 58.

11. Quasi-Contracts
1. State of W.B. v. B.K. Mondal, AIR 1962 SC 779