LL.B. — Three-Year Academic Support

Welcome to LL.B. — Three-Year Academic Support. We will study Law of Contract I: Offer, Acceptance, Consideration and Capacity, work through an example, and practise using the course's learning material. 3 years · 6 semesters · graduate-entry LL.B.. Year-wise / professional-phase study plans, original foundation workshops, answered practice and available protected LMS readings. The three-year LL.B. requires an eligible prior bachelor's degree. Sign in and use the study header to open your authorised course. Select this published lesson. Start Course Tutor with Auto audio on: it teaches continuously, answers a typed question, then resumes. Communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made. Problem 1 — the crossed letters. On 1 March Asha posts a letter to Bala offering to sell her car for an invented price of Rs 3,00,000. Bala receives it on 3 March and posts an acceptance at 10 a.m. on 4 March. At 11 a.m. on 4 March Asha telephones Bala and revokes the offer. The acceptance reaches Asha on 6 March. Reasoning: A proposal may be revoked only before communication of acceptance is complete as against the proposer. That happened at 10 a.m. on 4 March when Bala posted the letter and it went out of his power. Asha's revocation at 11 a.m. is too late. A binding contract exists. Check: the revocation had to come before 10 a.m.; it came an hour later; the answer is the same. Problem 2 — the counter-proposal. Chetan offers to supply 500 invented units of stationery at Rs 40 each. Divya replies, "Accepted at Rs 38 each." Chetan does not respond. Divya later writes, "I now accept at Rs 40." Reasoning: Divya's first reply varied the price and so was a counter-proposal, which rejected Chetan's proposal. The later letter is a fresh proposal from Divya, which Chetan is free to accept or ignore. No contract exists unless Chetan accepts it. Problem 3 — the minor borrower. A seventeen-year-old mortgages his share in a house to secure a loan and receives the money. The lender, knowing his age, sues to enforce the mortgage. Reasoning: A minor is not competent to contract, so the agreement is void. Following Mohori Bibee, the lender cannot enforce the mortgage; the court will not convert a void contract into an obligation to repay merely because the minor received money, particularly where the lender knew of the minority. Which mistake would change the reasoning in this example? 1. Calling a shop display an offer. Correction: it is an invitation to offer; the customer makes the proposal at the counter. 2. Applying the English rule that consideration must move from the promisee. Correction: section 2(d) allows it to move from "any other person". Ask Course Tutor: please explain this step from the example. Asha's revocation at 11 a.m. is too late. A binding contract exists. Why does it follow? Add what you tried, so the explanation addresses your difficulty. Now try the source practice. A reward notice is published. X finds the lost item and returns it without having seen the notice. Can X claim? Pause before the answer. The source answer is: No. Acceptance requires knowledge of the offer, as held in Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt. Compare your reasoning as well as the result. If your response differs, return to the worked example and identify the step that needs correction. Explain the key idea in your own words, revisit any mistaken step, then continue to the next lesson. Use Stop to end Course Tutor when you finish.