Skip to main content

Offer and Invitation to offer

 Offer and Invitation to offer

Section 2(a) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 defines proposal. When one person signifies his willingness to do or abstain from doing something with a view to obtain the assent of another person is called a proposal.

The person who makes an offer is called the Offeror and the person to whom the offer is made is called the Offeree.

 

There is a difference between an offer and an invitation for others to make an offer. An invitation for others to make an offer is not an offer within the meaning of “Offer” under the Contract Act.

Sometimes a person may not make an offer to sell his goods, but makes a statement or conducts in such a way, to make other persons make an offer to him. This is an invitation to offer.

Such situations generally include advertisements, tenders, goods on display, Expression of Interest (EoIs) and auction. In case of an auction, when the auctioneer starts the bid by quoting a price, it is basically for others to make him an offer with the amount in addition to the minimum price, which the auctioneer had announced.

Similarly, when a company floats tender for construction of a building, it basically is asking others (builders) to make them an offer by quoting the price of construction.

This is because an offer is an offer to buy and there is no offer to sell.

In Adikanda Biswal v. Bhubaneswar Development Authority, when a development authority made an announcement for allotment of plots on first come first serve basis on payment of full consideration. An application against this with full consideration was only considered to be an offer, as the Development authority only gave an invitation to offer, and the offer can only be formalized into a contract when it is accepted by the development authority.

 The concept of Invitation to offer was explained in the Privy Council case of Harvey v. Facey, the Plaintiffs in this asked two questions from the defendant i.e.- Would you sell me your Bumper Hall pen , telegram me the lowest price? , the Defendant only gave the answer to the latter question , post which he refused to sell. The Court held that the defendant was not to sell as he had only answered the second question and reserved the same for his first question. Thus, this clearly shows the distinction between an offer and invitation to offer.

Rules regarding display of goods in shops 

In Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists Southern Ltd., lord GODDARD CJ, said that it would be wrong to say that a shopkeeper intends to sell everything that is displayed in his shop. Meaning that the customer makes an offer, to which the shopkeeper has the discretion to accept or deny. The shopkeeper may say that he doesn’t have enough stock of that good and therefore may not sell. Similarly, a bankers catalogue of charges is also not an offer, the auction held by a person is also only an invitation to offer and he may not be liable for the transportation costs that people may have to pay to come to the place of auction, in case he cancels at the end moment.

 

Offer and Invitation to offer

By- SHAMBHAVI

VIP-AUTHOR

 
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

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
Post a Comment
Read more

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
1 comment
Read more

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
Post a Comment
Read more