Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.

Aston

Gujarat National
Law University
Gandhinagar, Gujarat (India)

Course Outline

of

Law of Contracts-I
(General Principles of Contract and Specific Reliefs)

For

BA/BCom/BSc/BBA/BSW, LLB

Semester: II (UG)

Session: 2016-17 (January –

June 2017)

Faculty:
Dr. Joshua N. Aston
Assistant Professor of Law
Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar
Email: jaston@gnlu.ac.in

Page 1 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

Sl. Page
Contents
No. No.
1.0 Objectives of the course 3

2.0 Proposed teaching schedule 4

3.0 Detailed course-outline 4

4.0 Prescribed/Recommended readings 15/16

5.0 Teaching methodology 17

6.0 Evaluation pattern 17

Tentative dates for test/submission of

7.0 17
project/GD, etc

8.0 Important instructions to students 17

9.0 Contact hours 18

Page 2 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

1.0 Objectives of the Course

Contracts are at the basis of majority of transactions. The general principles

governing the contracts are same in all walks of life. In a way, living in a modern
society would be impossible if the law does not recognize this contract making power
of a person. This prompted Roscoe Pound to make his celebrated observation:
‘Wealth, in a commercial age, is made up largely of promises.’

The conferment and protection by the law of this contract making power of persons
gives them a considerable leeway to strike the best bargain for themselves. In a way,
they are permitted to regulate and define their relations in the best possible manner
they choose. In India, these general principles are statutized in the form of the Indian
Contract Act 1872.

This course is designed to acquaint a student with the conceptual and operational
parameters of these general principles of contractual relations.

Specific reliefs, such as, specific performance of a contract, injunction, etc, are also
important aspects of the law of contracts. Therefore, the study of these reliefs also
forms a significant segment of this course.

By the end of the course, students will be able to:

 Demonstrate a thorough working knowledge of contract law.

 Understand contract case law and develop the ability to understand contract cases
and apply the cases.
 Understand the statutes and develop the ability to interpret it.
 Be able to understand the interrelationship between the statute and the relevant
laws& apply these statutes.

STATUTES TO BE STUDIED:

• The Indian Contract Act 1872

• The Specific Relief Act 1963

Page 3 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

2.0 Proposed Teaching Schedule

No. of
Module
Modules Sessions
No.
(Classes)
II.1.1 Formation of Contracts (Ss 1-9) 07
II.1.2 Consideration (Ss 2,10,25) 04
II.1.3 Capacity (Ss 11 & 12 ) 03
II.1.4 Consent (Ss 13 – 22) 08
II.1.5 Legality of Object (Void Agreements) (Ss 08
23 – 30)
II.1.6 Contingent Contracts (Ss 31 – 36) 01
II.1.7 Performance and Discharge of Contracts 08
(Ss 37– 67)
II.1.8 Quasi Contracts (Ss 68 – 72) 02
II.1.9 Consequences of Breach of Contracts (Ss 04
73 – 75)
II.1.10 Specific Relief Act 1963 (Ss 1 – 42) 08
II.1.11 E-Contracts and Government Contracts 02
Total =
____55____

3.0 Detailed Course Outline

Law of Contracts I
(General Principals of Contract and Specific Reliefs)

Page 4 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

Module- II.1.1 Formation of Contracts (Ss 1-9)

Sessions: 07
 Classification of law: public and private
 Private Law: substantive law and adjective law
 Right: right in rem and right in personam
 Law of Obligation
 Juristic concept of contract has two constituent elements:
o Obligation &
o Agreement
 Justification for the enforcement of a contract
 Principle of moral justification
 Principle of economic justification
 History and nature of contractual obligation
 The Indian Contract Act 1872: structure, extent, and commencement
 Ways by which a contractual relation can be created:
o By Agreement and Contract
o By Standard Form Contract
o By Promissory Estoppel

 Stages in the formation of a contract

 Agreement and contract
 Essentials of a contract (S. 10)
o Registration and effect of non-registration
o Attestation
o Prescribed forms – mandatory and non-mandatory requirements
o Stamp duty and effect of non-payment

 Proposal/ Offer
 Intention to contract
 Kinds of offer
 Invitation to offer
 Kinds of agreement
 Kinds of contract
 Acceptance
o Communication
o Modes of communication
o Absolute and unqualified
o Lapse of offer
o Revocation of acceptance
 Promissory estoppels
 Standard form contract

Cases
 Upton Rural District Council v Powell (1942) 1 All ER 220.
 Lalman Shukla v Gauri Datt (1913) 11 All LJ 489 at p.492.
Page 5 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Williams v Carwardine (1833) 4 B & Ad 621.

 Rose and Frank Co v JR Crompton & Bros Ltd (1925) AC 445.
 Balfour v Balfour (1919) 2 KB 571.
 Jones v Padavatton (1969) All ER 616.
 Meritt v Meritt (1970) 2 All ER 760.
 Mc Gregor v Mc Gregor (1888) 21 QBD 424.
 Simpkins v Pays (1955) 3 All ER 10.
 CWT v Abdul Hussain Mulla Md Ali (1988) 3 SCC 562.
 Banwari Lal v Sukhdarshan Dayal (1973) 1 SCC 294.
 Weeks v Tybald (1605) 75 ER 982.
 Carlill v Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (1893) 1QB 256.
 Harbhajan Lal v Harcharan Lal AIR 1925 All 539.
 Tinn v Hoffmann (1873) 29 LT 271.
 Harvey v Facey (1893) AC 552.
 Mc Pherson v Appana AIR 1951 184: 1951 SCR 161.
 Adikanda Biswal v Bhubaneshwar Development Authority AIR
2006 Ori 36.
 Badri Prasad v State of MP AIR 1970 SC 706.
 Grainger & Son v Gough (1896) AC 325,334.
 Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v Boots Cash Chemists
Ltd (1952) 2 QB 795.
 Harris v Nickerson (1873) LR 8 QB.
 Brogden v Metropolitan Railway Co (1877) 2 App Cas 666 HL.
 Felthouse v Bindley (1863) 7 LT 835.
 Powell v Lee (1908) 24 TLR 606.
 Adams v Lindsell (1818) 106 ER 250 Court of King’s Bench
 Household Fire & Accident Insurance Co v Grant (1879) LR 4 Ex
Div 26 (CA).
 Dunlop v Higgins (1848) 1 HLC 381.
 Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation (1955) 2 All ER 493.
 Brinkbon Ltd v Stahag Stahl WG (1982) 2 WLR 264 HL.
 Bhagwan Das Goverdhan Das Kedia v Girdharilal Parshottam Das
& Co AIR 1966 SC 543.
 Hyde v Wrench (1840) 3 Beave 334.
 Stevenson, Jaques & Co v McLean (1880) 5 QBD 346.
 LIC of India v R Vasireddy AIR 1984 SC 1014.
 State of MP v Goverdhan Dass AIR 1973 SC 1164.
 Managing Committee, SGA High School v State of Bihar AIR 1981
Pat 271.
 Union of India v Gopal Chandra Misra AIR 1978 SC 694: (1978) 2
SCC 301.
 Rajendra Kumar Verma v State of MP AIR 1972 MP 131.
 Sharad Trading Co v State of MP AIR 1980 MP 91.
 Mountford v Scott (1975) 1 All ER 198.
 Dickinson v Dodds (1876) 2 Ch D 463.
 Chapelton v Barry Urban District Council (1940) 1 KB 532.
Page 6 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Henderson v Stevenson (1875) 2 HL (SC) APP 470

 Parker v South Eastern Railway Co (1877) 2 CPD 416.
 Thorton v Shoe Lane Parking Ltd (1971) 1 All ER 686.
 Olley v Marlborough Court Hotel (1949) 1 KB 532.
 Curtis v Chemical Cleaning and Dying Co (1951) 1 KB 805.
 Central Inland Water Transport Corporation Ltd v Brojo Nath
Ganguli AIR 1986 SC 1571.
 Lilly White v Munnu Swami AIR 1966 Mad 13.
 R S Deboo v Hindlekar AIR 1955 Bom 68.
 Wallis v Pratt (1911) AC 394.
 Union of India v Anglo (Indo) Afghan Agencies AIR 1968 SC 718.
 Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills v State of UP AIR 1979 SC 621.
 Union of India v Godfrey Philips India Ltd AIR 1986 SC 813.
 Pournami Oil Mills v State of Kerala AIR 1987 SC 590.
 Delhi Cloth and General Mills v Union of India (1988) 1 SCC 86.
 Amrit Banaspati Co v State of Punjab AIR 1992 SC 1075.

Module- II.1.2. Consideration (Ss 2, 10, 25)

Sessions: 04
 Definition and essentials
 Privity of contract and of consideration
 Past, present, future and adequate consideration
 Exceptions

Cases
 Durga Prasad v Baldeo (1880) 3 All 221.
 Kedar Nath v Gorie Mohamed 1886 ILR 14 Cal 64.
 Doraswami Iyer v Arunachala Ayyar AIR 1936 Mad 135.
 Abdul Aziz v Masum Ali AIR 1914 All 22.
 Errington v Errington (1952) 1 KB 290.
 Chinnaya v Venkataramayya (1882) 4 Mad 137.
 Dutton v Poole Court of King’s Bench (1677) 2 Levinz 210: 83 ER
523.
 Tweddle v Atkinson 123 ER 762: 30 LJ QB 218.
 Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co v Selfridge & Co (1915) AC 847.
 Jamna Das v Ram Autar (1911) 39 IA 7: ILR 34 All 63.
 Krishna Lal v Promila Bala AIR 1928 Cal 518.
 MC Chacko v State Bank of Travancore AIR 1970 SC 504.
 Beswick v Beswick (1966) 3 All ER 1.
 Khwaja Mohammad Khan v Hussaini Begum (1910) 37 IA 152.
 Rana Uma Nath Baksh Singh v Jung Bahadur AIR 1938 PC 245.
 Gregory & Parker v Williams (1817) 3 Mer 582: 36 ER 224.
 Daropti v Jaspat Rai (1905) PR 171 (Punjab Rec).
 Sunderaja Aiyangar v Lakshmiammal (1915) 38 Mad 788.

Page 7 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Narayani Devi v Tagore Commercial Corporation Ltd AIR 1963 Cal

401.
 Devaraja Urs v Ram Krishnaiah AIR 1952 Mys 109.
 Tulk v Moxhay (1919) 88 LJKB 861 HL.
 Smith & Snipes Hall Farm Ltd v River Douglas Catchment Board
(1949) 2 KB 500.
 Mc Ardle, In re (1951) 1 Ch 669
 Lamleigh v Brathwait Hob 105: 80 ER 255.
 White v Bluett (1853) 23 LJ Ex 36.
 Chidambara v PS Renga AIR 1965 SC 193, 197: (1966) 1 SCR 168.
 R Sashannah Chetty v P Ramaswamy Chetty (1868) 4 MHC 7.
 Ward v Byham (1956) 1 WLR 496.
 Ramchandra Chintaman v Kalu Raju (1877) 2 Bom 362.
 Stilk v Myrick (1809) 2 Camp 317.
 Shadwell v Shadwell (1860) 9 CB (NS) 159.
 Gopal Co Ltd v Hazarilal Co AIR 1963 MP 37.
 Thomas v Thomas (1842) 2 QB 851, 859.
 Pinnel v Cole (1602) 77 ER 237.
 Rajlukhy Dabee v Bhootnath Mookerjee (1900) 4 CWN 488.
 Bhiwa v Shivaram (1899) 1 Bom LR 495.
 Pestenji Manekji Mody v Bai Meherbai (1928) 30 Bom LR 1407.
 P Govinda Nair v P Achutan Nair AIR 1940 Mad 678.
 Tulsi Ram v Same Singh AIR 1981 Del 165.
 Daulat Ram v Som Nath AIR 1981 Del 354.
 Debi Prasad v Bhagwati Prasad AIR 1943 All 63.

Module- II.1.3. Capacity (Competency) (Ss 11 & 12)

Sessions: 03

 Minor
o Effect of minor’s agreement
o Beneficial agreements
o Ratification
o Liabilities for necessaries
 Position of persons of unsound mind
 Legal disqualification, viz section 136 of Transfer of Property Act,
section 75 of the Indian Forests Act,
 Contract making power of Companies, Corporations, Partnership firms,
Trusts, Cooperative Societies, Government and the like
 Distinction between competency and authority

Cases
 Mohori Bibi v Dharmodas Ghose (1903) 30 IA 114: 30 Cal 539.
 Arumugan v Duraisinga ILR (1914) 37 Mad 38.
Page 8 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Suraj Narain v Sukhu Aheer AIR 1928 All 440.

 Kundan Bibi v Sree Narayan (1906-7) 11 Cal WN 135.
 Narain Singh v Chiranjilal AIR 1924 All 730.
 Leslie v Sheill (1914) 3 KB 607.
 Khan Gul v Lakha Singh AIR 1928 Lahore 609.
 Ajudhiya Prasad v Chandan Lal AIR 1937 All 610.
 Kunwarlal v Surajmal AIR 1963 MP 58.
 Sham Charan Mal v Chowdhary Debya Singh ILR (1894) 21 Cal
872.
 Kidar Nath v Ajudhiya Persad (1883) Punjab Record, Case No 165,
p.522.
 Nash v Inman (1908) 2 KB 1.
 Ryder v Wombwell (1868) LR 3 Ex 90.
 Roberts v Gray (1913) 1 KB 520.
 Raj Rani v Prem Adib AIR 1949 Bom 315.
 Khimji Kuverji v Lalji Karamasi AIR 1941 Bom 129.
 Srikakulam Subrahmanyam v Kurra Subba Rao (1949) 75 IA 115.
 Raghwa Chariar v Srinivasa (1916) 40 Mad 308.
 The Great American Insurance Co v Madan Lal AIR 1935 Bom 353.
 Valentini v Canali (1889) 24 QBD 166: (1889) 59 LJ QB 74.
 Jennings v Rundall (1799) 8 Term Rep 335.
 Burnard v Haggis (1863) 4 CBNS 45.
 Ballet v Mingay (1943) KB 281.
 Inder Singh v Parmeshwardhari Singh AIR 1957 Pat 491

Module- II.1.4. Consent (Ss 13 – 22)

Sessions: 08

 Consent (S. 13): Consensus ad idem

 Free consent (S. 14)
 Vitiating Factors:
o Coercion
o Undue influence
o Misrepresentation
o Fraud
o Mistake
 Effect of flaw/s in consent
o Right of rescission of the contract (Ss 19, 19-A, and S. 27, SRA);
and
o Right to claim compensation.
Page 9 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Modes of rescinding a contract

 Limitation on the right of rescission [S. 27 (2), SRA]

Cases
 Chikham Ammiraju v Chikham Seshamma ILR (1918) 41 Mad 33.
 Ranganayakamma v Alwar Setti ILR (1889) 13 Mad 214.
 Workmen of Appin Tea Estate v Industrial Tribunal AIR 1966
Assam 115.
 Krishan Lal Kalra v New Delhi Municipal Corporation AIR 2001
Delhi 402.
 Andhra Sugars Ltd v State of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1968 SC 599.
 Mannu Singh v Umadat Pande (1890) 12 All 523.
 Phillip Lukka v Franciscan Association AIR 1987 Ker 204.
 Allcard v Skinner (1887) 36 Ch D 145.
 Niko Devi v Kirpa AIR 1989 HP 51.
 Takri Devi v Rama Dogra AIR 1984 HP 11.
 Lakshmi Amma v Telengala Narayana Bhatta AIR 1970 SC 1367.
 Wajid Khan v Raja Ewaj Ali Khan ILR (1891) 18 IA 144.
 Mst Kharbuja Kuer v Jang Bahadur Rai AIR 1963 SC 1203.
 Raghunath Prasad v Sarju Prasad AIR 1924 PC 60.
 Shrimati v Sudhakar R Bhatkar AIR 1988 Bom 122.
 Lloyds Bank v Bundy (1975) 1 QB 326.
 Edgington v Fitzmaurice (1885) 29 Ch D 459.
 V Srinivasa Pillai v LIC of India AIR 1977 SC 381.
 P Sarojam v LIC of India AIR 1986 Ker 201.
 Kiran Bala v Bhaire Prasad Srivastava AIR 1982 MP 242.
 With v O’Flanagan (1936) 1 All ER 727.
 Shri Krishan v Kurukshetra University AIR 1976 SC 376.
 Delhi Development Authority v Skipper Construction Co (P) Ltd
(2000) 10 SCC 130.
 Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337.
 Bindu Sharma v Ram Prakash Sharma AIR 1997 All 429.
 Attwood v Small (1838) 6 C&F 232.
 Peek v Gurney (1873) LR 6 HL 377.
 Derry v Peek (1889) 14 App Cas 337.
 Oriental Bank Corporation v John Fleming (1879) 3 Bom 242.
 Shoshi Mohun Pal Chaudhary v Nobo Krishto Poddar (1874) 5 Cal
801.
 Car and Universal Finance Co Ltd v Caldwell (1961) 1 QB 525.
 Long v Lloyd (1958) 1 WLR 753.
 Wallis v Pratt (1911) AC 394.
 Phillips v Brooks Ltd (1919) 2 KB 243.
 Allcard v Skinner (1887) 36 Ch D 145.
 Leaf v International Galleries (1950) 2 KB 86.
 Raffles v Wichelhaus (1864) 2 H&C 906—the Peerless Case.

Page 10 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Haji Abdul Rehman Allarakhia v The Bombay & Persia Steam

Navigation Co (1892) 16 Bom 561.
 Couturier v Hastie (1856) 5 HL Cas 673.
 Seikh Bros Ltd v Ochener (1957) AC 136 (PC).
 Smith v Hughes (1871) LR 6 QB 597.
 Bell v Lever Bros Ltd (1932) AC 161.
 Cooper v Phibbs (1867) LR 2 HL 149.
 Boulton v Jones (1857) 27 LJ Ex 117.
 Said v Butt (1920) 3 KB 497.
 Cundy v Lindsay (1878) 3 App Cas 459.
 Phillips v Brooks Ltd (1919) 2 KB 243.
 Lewis v Averay (1971) 3 All ER 907.
 Ingram v Little (1961) 1 QB 31.
 Hartog v Colin and Sheilds (1939) 3 All ER 566.
 Kochavareed v Mariappa AIR 1950 Trav-Cochin 10.
 State of Karnataka v Stellar Construction Co AIR 2003 Kant 6.

Module- II.1.5. Legality of Object (Void Agreements) (Ss 23 – 30)

Sessions: 08

 Unlawful Agreements
o What objects and considerations are lawful
 Void Agreements
o Without Consideration (S 25)
o In Restraint of Marriage (S 26 )
o In Restraint of Trade (S 27 )
o In Restraint of Legal Proceedings (S 28 )
o Uncertain Agreements (S 29 )
o Wagering Agreements (S 30)

Cases
 Brij Mohan v MPSRTC AIR 1987 SC 29.
 Nandlal v Thomas J William, 171 IC 948.
 Sujan Singh v Mohkam Chand AIR 1983 P&H 180.
 Sundara Gownder v Balachandran AIR 1990 Ker 324.
 Ram Sewak v Ram Charan AIR 1982 All 177.
 Fateh Singh v Sanwal Singh (1878) 1 All 751.
 Bai Vijli v Nansa Nagar (1885) 10 Bom 152.
 Pyare Mohan v Narayani AIR 1982 Raj 43.
 Gheru Lal Parekh v Mahadeodas Maiya AIR 1959 SC 781.
 Ouseph Poulo v Catholic Union Bank AIR 1965 SC 166.
 Union Carbide Corporation v Union of India AIR 1992 SC 248.
 Central Inland Water Transport Corporation v Brojo Nath Ganguly
(1986) 3 SCC 156: AIR 1986 SC 1571.
Page 11 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Alice Mary Hill v William Clark (1905) 27 All 266.

 Madhub Chander v Raj Coomar Dass (1874) XIV Bengal Law
Reports 76.
 Nordenfelt v Maxim Nordenfelt Guns & Ammunition Co Ltd (1894)
AC 535.
 Gujarat Bottling Co Ltd v Coca Cola Co (1995) 5 SCC 545: AIR
1995 SC 2372.
 Esso Petroleum v Harper's Garage (Stourport) Ltd [1968] 2 AC
269
 Vancouver Malt & Sake Brewing Co v Vancouver Breweries Ltd
AIR 1934 PC 101.
 S B Fraser & Co v Bombay Ice Mfg Co (1904) 29 ILR Bom 107.
 Charlesworth v Mac Donald ILR (1898) 23 Bom 103.
 Niranjan Shankar Golikari v Century Spinning & Manufacturing
Co Ltd AIR 1967 1098.
 Percept D’Mark (India) Ltd v Zaheer Khan (2006) 4 SCC 227.
 Percept Talent Management Pvt. Ltd. & Percept D’Mark India Pvt.
Ltd. v Yuvraj Singh & Globosport India Private Limited 2008 (2)
ARBLR 49 Bom, 2008 (2) BomCR 654.
 Supreintendence Company of India v Krishna Murgai AIR 1980 SC
1717: (1981) 2 SCC 246.
 Hakam Singh v Gammon (India) Ltd AIR 1971 SC 740.
 Vulcan Insurance Co v Maharaj Singh AIR 1976 SC 287.
 National Insurance Co v Sujir Ganesh Nayak & Co AIR 1997 SC
2049.
 Babasahab v Rajaram AIR 1931 Bom 264.
 Diggle v Higge (1877) 2 Ex D 422.
 Brahm Dutt Sharma v LIC of India AIR 1966 All 474.
 Subhash Kumar Manwani v State of MP AIR 2000 MP 109.
 BR Enterprises v State of UP AIR 1999 SC 867.
 Kong Yee Lone & Co v Lowjee Nanjee (1903) 29 IA 239.
 Gherulal Parekh v Mahadeodas Maiya AIR 1959 SC 781.

Module- II.1.6. Contingent Contracts (Ss 31 – 36)

Sessions: 01

 Definition (S 31)
 Enforcement of contracts contingent on an event happening (S 32)
 Enforcement of contracts contingent on an event not happening (S
33)
 When event on which a contract is contingent is deemed to be
 Impossible, if it is the future conduct of a living person (S 34)
 When contracts become void which are contingent on the happening
of a specified event within fixed time(S 35)
 Agreements contingent on impossible events, void (S 36)
Page 12 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

Cases
 Harbaksh Singh Gill v Ram Ratan AIR 1988 P&H 60.
 Bashir Ahmad v Government of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1970 SC
1089.

Module- II.1.7. Performance and Discharge of Contracts (Ss 37 – 67)

Sessions: 08

 Discharge of a contract
o Meaning
o Modes:
 By performance (Ss 37-55, 57-61)

 The obligation
o Perform
o Offer to perform, valid offer to perform, effect
 Types of obligations
o Absolute
o Contingent
o Reasonable efforts, due diligence, best
endeavours and the like
o Obligation to achieve results, and take best
efforts
o Reasonable care
o Positive and negative obligations

 By impossibility of performance (S. 56)

 By agreement and novation (Ss 62-67)
 By breach (Ss 39, 73, 74)

 Performance of a contract (Ss 37-45)

 Time and place for performance (Ss 46-50)
 Performance of reciprocal promises (Ss 51-54,
57-58)
 Appropriation of payments (Ss 59-61)
 Effect of failure to perform at fixed time, in
contract in which time is essential (S. 55)
 Discharge by impossibility of Performance
o Connotation of doctrine of frustration.
o Specific grounds of frustration
o Effect of frustration
o Limitation of frustration

Page 13 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Limitation of frustration contracts which need

not be performed

Cases
 Bhudra Chund v Betts (1915) 22 Cal LJ 566.
 Mahabir Prasad Rungta v Durga Dutt AIR 1961 SC 990.
 China Cotton Exporters v Behari Lal Ramcharan Cotton Mills Ltd
AIR 1961 SC 1295.
 Caltex (India) Ltd v Bhagwan Devi Marodia AIR 1969 SC 405.
 Bismillah Begum v Rahmatullah Khan AIR 1998 SC 970.
 Hind Construction Contractors v State of Maharashtra (1979) 2
SCC 70.
 Paradine v Jane, King’s Bench (1647) Aleyn 26: 82 ER 897.
 Taylor v Caldwell, Queen’s Bench (1863) 3 B&S 826: 122 ER 309.
 Krell v Henry (1903) 2 KB 740 CA.
 Alopi Parshad & Sons Ltd v Union of India AIR 1960 SC 588:
(1960) 2 SCR 793.
 Tarapore & Co v Cohin Shipyard Ltd (1984) 2 SCC 680.
 Robinson v Davison (1871) LR 6 Exch 269.
 Man Singh v Khazan Singh AIR 1961 Raj 277.
 Metropolitan Water Board v Dick Kerr & Co Ltd (1918) AC 119;
 Satyabrata Ghose v Mugneeram Bangur & Co AIR 1954 SC 44;
 Naihati Jute Mills Ltd v Khyaliram Jagannath AIR 1968 SC 522.
 Tsakiorglou & Co Ltd v Noblee & Thorl (1961) 2 All ER 179.
 Raja Dhruv Dev Chand v Raja Harmohinder Singh AIR 1968 SC
1024.
 Sushila Devi v Hari Singh AIR 1971 SC 1956.

Module- II.1.8. Quasi Contracts (Ss 68 – 72)

Sessions: 02

 Rationale
 Claim for necessaries supplied to a person incapable of contracting, or
on his account (S. 68)
 Reimbursement of a person paying money due by another, in payment of
which he is interested (S. 69)
 Obligation of a person enjoying benefits of non-gratuitous act (S. 70)
 Responsibility of a finder of goods (S. 71)
 Liability of a person to whom money is paid, or thing delivered by
mistake or under coercion (S 72)

Cases
 Govindram Gordhandas Seksaria v State of Gondal AIR 1950 PC
99.
Page 14 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Port Trust, Madras v Bombay Company AIR 1967 Mad 318.

 Secretary of State for India v Fernandes (1907) 30 Mad 375.
 Indu Mehta v State of UP AIR 1987 All 309.
 PC Wadhwa v State of Punjab AIR 1987 P&H 117.
 State of WB v BK Mondal & Sons AIR 1962 SC 779.
 Sales Tax Officer, Banaras v Kanhaiya Lal Mukund Lal Saraf AIR
1959 SC 135.
 Plinche v Colburn (1831) 8 Bing, 14: (1831) 5 C&P 58.
 Craven-Ellis v Canons Ltd (1936) 2 KB 403: (1936) 2 All ER 1066,
CA.

Module- II.1.9. Consequences of Breach of Contracts (Ss 73 – 75)

Sessions: 04

 Discharge by breach of contract

o How?
 Kinds of breach
o Anticipatory breach (S. 39)
o Actual (present) breach
 Remedies under S. 39.
 Remedies for the breach of contract
o Damages
o Specific performance and injunction
o Quantum meruit
 Kinds of Damages
o General/ordinary damages
o Special damages
o Nominal damages
o Vindictive/exemplary/punitive damages
 Unliquidated Damages (S. 73)
 Two issues to be addressed in an action for
damages
o Remoteness of damages
o Measure/quantum of damages
 Liquidated Damages and Penalty (S. 74)
 Party rightfully rescinding contract, entitled
for compensation (S. 75)
 Quantum Meruit
o Concept
o Distinction between ‘quantum meruit’ and ‘damages’

Cases
 West Bengal Financial Corporation v Glurco Series Pvt Ltd AIR
1973 Cal 268.
Page 15 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

 Sooltan Chand v Schiller (1878) 4 Cal 252.

 Frost v Knight (1872) LR 7 Ex 111.
 Avery v Bowden (1855) 5 E&B 714.
 Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd (1949) 2
KB 528 CA: (1949) 1 All ER 997.
 Heron II, Koufos v C Czarnikow Ltd (1967) 3 All ER 686.
 Ghaziabad Development Authority v Union of India AIR 2000 SC
2003.
 Anglia Television Ltd v Reed (1972) 1 QB 60: (1971) 3 All ER 690.
 Prema v Mustak Ahmed AIR 1987 Guj 106.
 Laxminarayan v Sumitra AIR 1995 MP 86.
 Simpson v London & North Western Railway Co (1876) 1 QBD
274.
 Dominion of India v All India Reporter Ltd AIR 1952 Nag 32.
 Jamal A K A S v Moola Dawood Sons & Co ILR (1916) 43 Cal 493.
 WL Thompson Ltd v Robinson (Gun makers) Ltd (1955) Ch 177.
 Charter v Sullivan (1957) QB 117.
 Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co v New Garage and Motor Co Ltd
(1915) AC 79.
 Fatehchand v Balkishan Das (1964) 1 SCR 515: AIR 1963 SC 1405.
 Maula Bux v Union of India AIR 1970 SC 1955.
 Union of India v Rampur Distillery & Chemical Co Ltd AIR 1973
SC 1098.
 Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd v SAW Pipes Ltd AIR 2004,
SC 2629.

Module- II.1.10 Specific Relief Act 1963 (Ss 1 – 41)

Sessions: 08

 Origin and nature of specific relief

 Recovering possession of property
 Specific performance of contracts
 Rectification of instruments
 Rescission of contracts
 Cancellation of instruments
 Declaratory decrees
 Preventive relief (contracts and relief by way of injunction)
o Temporary
o Perpetual
Cases
 Jabalpur Cable Network Pvt Ltd v ESPN Software India Pvt Ltd
AIR 1999 MP 271.
 Gobind Ram v Gian Chand AIR 2000 SC 3106.
 K Narendra v Riviera Apartments (P) Ltd AIR 1999 SC 2309.

Page 16 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

Module- II.1.11. E-Contracts and Government Contracts

Sessions: 02

 E-Contracts
o Nature and forms
o Formation
o Validity of e-contracts
 Government Contracts
o Art 299
o Award of contracts
o Formation and enforcement
o Effect of a valid contract with the government (contractual
liability)
o Awards of contracts
o Ratification
o Application of doctrine of Estoppel
o Government contract and Art 14
o Issue of writs in the matters of contracts

Cases
 Bhikraj Jaipuria v Union of India AIR 1962 SC 113.
 Union of India v Rallia Ram (AIR 1963 SC 1685.
 KP Chaudhary v State of MP AIR 1967 SC 203.
 Mulam Chand v State of MP AIR 1968 SC 1218.
 Steel Authority of India v State of MP AIR 1999 SC 1630.
 Ramanna Dayaram Shetty v International Airport Authority AIR
1979 SC 1628.
 Mahabir Auto Stores v Indian Oil Corporation AIR 1990 SC
1031.
 Tata Cellular v Union of India (AIR 1996 Sc 11).
 State of West Bengal v BK Mondal & Sons AIR 1962 SC 779.

4.0 Prescribed/Recommended Readings

Prescribed Readings

1. H. G. Beale, W. D. Bishop, & M. P. Furmston, Contract Cases &

Materials (Oxford University Press Inc., 2008)
2. Jack Beatson, William Anson, Andrew Burrows, John
Cartwright, (eds), Anson’s Law of Contract (29th edn., Oxford
University Press, 2010).
3. Hugh Beale, Chitty on Contracts (Vol. 1 & 2, 30th edn, Sweet &

Page 17 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

Maxwell, 2011)
4. Dinshaw Fardunji Mulla, The Indian Contract Act, LexisNexis’
Student Series, Anirudh Wadhwa (Ed.) (LexisNexis
Butterworths India, 2011).
5. Jill Poole, Casebook on Contract Law (10th edn, Oxford
University Press, 2010).
6. Nilima Bhadbhade (Ed.), Pollock and Mulla, Law of Contract
and Specific Relief Acts (14th edn, Lexis Nexis Butterworths,
2013)
7. Avtar Singh, Contract and Specific Relief (11th edn., Eastern
Book Company, 2016).
8. Avtar Singh, Textbook on Law of Contract & Specific Relief Act
(6th edn., Eastern Book Company, 2016)
9. Akhileshwar Pathak, Law of Sale of Goods (1st edn, Oxford
University Press, 2013).
10. G. H. Treitel, The Law of Contracts (Sweet and Maxwell,
2007)
11. V Kesava Rao, Contracts I: Cases and Materials,
(LexisNexis Butterworths India, 2004).

Recommended Readings

1. Jack Beatson, Andrew Burrows and John Cartwright, Anson’s

Law of Contract (29th edn., Oxford University Press, 2010)
2. Sairam Bhat, Law of Business Contracts in India (Sage
Publications India, 2009).
3. Andrew Burrows & Edwin Peel, Contract Formation and
Parties (Oxford University Press, 2010).
4. Cheshire, Law of Contract (London: Butterworths, 2001).
5. Henry Cunningham & Horatio Shephard, Commentaries on
Contract Act (Law Publishers (India) Pvt. Ltd, 2009).
6. Michael Furmstom, Law of Contract (Lexis Nexis and
Butterworth’s, 2003)
12. T S V Iyer, Law of Contracts and Tenders (10th edn, S
Gogia & Co., 2008).
13. GCV Subba Rao, Law of Contract and Specific Relief
Acts (S Gogia & Co., 2003).
7. M. A. Sujan, Interpretation of Contract (Universal Law
Publishing Pvt. Ltd, 2000).
8. Akhileshwar Pathak, Contract Management Understanding
Business Contracts (MacMillan India Ltd, 2009).
9. Nilima Bhadbhade, Contract Law in India (2nd edn, Kluwer Law
Intl., 2012)
10. N Stephan Kinsella, & Andrew Simpson, (eds.), Online
Page 18 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

Contract Formation (1st edn, Oceana Publications, 2004).

11. B S Ramaswamy, Contracts and their Management
(LexisNexis Butterworths India, 2008).
12. Susan Singleton, E-Contract (Tottel Publishing, 2001).

Statutes to be Studied
 The Indian Contract Act, 1872
 Specific Relief Act, 1963

Besides the afore-stated statutes, the students are also expected to

go through the relevant Reports of Law Commission of India.

5.0 Teaching Methodology

• Lecture-delivery—A combination of Socratic as well as

Interactive Method—a dialectical method to stimulate critical
thinking
• Case-study method
Besides the above methods following teaching techniques will
be used.
• Class-participation
• Project-assignment, if needed
• Presentations by the students
• Inviting Visiting Faculty, if required
• Use of teaching aids, such as, power point
presentation
• Problem Solving Exercises
• Workshop / Role Play on Current developments in
the Business environment and related laws and
proposed amendments by the Government of India
in related Acts
• Class-participation / Brain Storming Session

Page 19 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

6.0 Evaluation Pattern

Evaluation:
Marks

Continuous Evaluation…………………………………………….……………….20
Mid-Semester Test …………………………………………………………………30
End-Semester
Examination……………………………………....................................50

Total
100

Continuous Evaluation: (Continuous Evaluation of 50 marks, as

mentioned above, shall be done through CLASS TESTS)

7.0 Tentative Dates for Continuous Evaluation Tests/

Submission of Project/ GD, etc

Test-1: Class Test - 20 Marks (First week of Feb 2017)

8.0 Important Instructions to Students

 This course-outline is tentative. The faculty-member may modify it

while engaging the classes.
 The teaching methodology of the subject will not necessarily be
bound by the parameters mentioned hereunder.
 The faculty-member may not necessarily follow the sequence of
the modules. The sequence will be in accordance with the need of
the subject and teaching. Flexibility is required to do complete
justice to the subject.
 Active and positive class participation is mandatory. Maintaining
the dignity and decorum of the class is equally mandatory. Once
the class has begun (after the attendance is taken), the students
will not be allowed to enter the class room.
 The students are required to come to the class with necessary
home work, which will be beneficial for positive participation in
learning–teaching process.

Page 20 of 21
Semester: II Course: Law of Contracts I Faculty: Dr. Joshua N.
Aston

9.0 Contact Hours

Days: Wednesday / Thursday

Timings: Between 4:00pm and 5:00pm

Page 21 of 21