Skip to main content

Lalman shukla case analysis

 Lalman Shukla Case Analysis

By Nemi Bhavsar


Facts:


The facts of the case are that the nephew of the defendant departed from his house secretly and no one was able to find him .The defendants sent his servant in different places in search of his nephew. All the servants went to Haridwar in search of the defendant’s nephew. Plaintiff was one of the servant who went to Haridwar in search of the defendant’s nephew .Meanwhile the search of the child was taking place and the plaintiff was in search of the child the defendant issued the handbill claiming that if anyone finds his nephew and bring him back then he would be rewarded with rupees 501.But the plaintiff have no idea of this revolt and he was finally able to track down the lost child and conveyed the same to the defendant .The plaintiff after returning from Haridwar with the defendant’s nephew was awarded with rupees 20 with two sovereigns. The plaintiff was satisfied with that reward and started doing his regular work. Later on after the six months of the incident which had taken place the defendant removed the plaintiff from the services because of some disputes and then the plaintiff brought a suit against his master claiming the prize money of rupees 499 ,stating that it was promised by his master that whosoever would find his nephew would be entitled to the reward and you also alleged that is master has not provided the referred for the performance of his promise.


Issues:


1)Whether plaintiff, Lalman Shukla was entitled to get the award
2)Whether the situation results in a contract?
3)Whether the decision of the lower court is right?
Arguments:
The petitioner argued that under Section 8 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 it clearly states that:
Performance of the conditions of a proposal, or the acceptance of any consideration for a reciprocal promise which may be offered with a proposal, is an acceptance of the proposal.
So he argues that since fulfills the conditions of the offer, therefore he is entitled to get the award and it does not matter whether he was aware of the offer at that time or not. And he argued since the offer was whoever will trace the missing child, will get an award which he has fulfilled so he is entitled to get the award.
The Respondents argued that to convert an offer to a contract, there must be acceptance to an offer and since plaintiff was not aware of the offer so there was no assent from his side for the acceptance of the offer, so he cannot avail award for the same. Moreover, he argued that since plaintiff was a servant so at the time of searching the child, he was fulfilling his duties as a servant to house.


Analysis


In order to fulfill the contract there must be an acceptance of an offer and for the acceptance of an offer there should be the knowledge of the offer . According to Section 4 of Indian Contract Act which gives the condition that when the communication of a proposal is completed and it clearly states that the communication of a proposal is complete only when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer and in the current situation if we will look into the facts it is clearly stated that the plaintiff has already found the defendant’s nephew and already conveyed him regarding the same and he didn’t even have the knowledge about what the offer which was made by the the defendant and after that plaintiff was also satisfied with the amount which was given to him by the defendant as a reward.
So therefore this is not considered as a contract because the main essential element that is knowledge to the offer is not a present in this case. And if there is no knowledge then how there was an acceptance for the same and if there was no acceptance then there was no valid contract enforceable in the eye of the law.


Conclusion


The Allahabad High Court excused the offended party’s case. The acknowledgment of the offer was not finished in light of the fact that the offended party had no data about the hand-bills. For acknowledgment of an offer, information on the offer is fundamental.
It was chosen by the respectable Court that the offer and arrangement can’t be supposed to be legitimate in light of the fact that the offended party didn’t do any new representation getting the honor. The demonstration that the offended party performed was a commitment over the span of his business and not a piece of the understanding for remuneration. There was no thought in the interest of the offended party for which he can guarantee the litigant’s award.
This case remains perhaps the main case in the field of agreement law in India. Different arrangements of the Act were unpredictably talked about and broadly deciphered by the Honorable Court, and the fundamentals of agreement making were managed widely.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree