Download Misrepresentation and Breach of Contract: A Case Study and more Study notes Contract Law in PDF only on Docsity!
P
BA.LL.B 5 YEARS PROGRAMME BA.LL.B (3) 2021- MOOT COURT PROBLEM:- ON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE DISTRICT COURT OF DELHI IN THE CIVIL SUIT NO. ________ 2021 Mr. AJAY. Plaintiff V. MS. KAJAL.. Defendant MEMORIAL FOR THE PLANTIFF GITARATTAN INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS SCHOOL. Drawn and filed by the Counsel for the Plantiff 1
TABLE OF CONTENT
SL.NO. TITLE
- Table of cases
- List abbreviations
- Index of authorities
- Statement of facts
- Statement of jurisdiction
- Statement of issues
- Statement of arguments
- Arguments advance
- Prayer 2
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Rs. Rupees req. Request const Construction compen. Compensation aggr Agreement 4
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
BOOKS:
1. R.K. BANGIA: INDIAN CONTRACT ACT 2.. AVATAR SINGH: CONTRACT AND SPECIFIC RELIEF 3.SURENDRA SAHAI SRIVASTAVA: LAW OF CONTACT- I AND II STATUTARY COMPILATIONS: INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872 WEBSITES:- Sr. No Research Database 1 www.indiankanoon.con 2 www.manupatra.com 3 www.legalserviceindia.com 5
agreed for this but before the party she got sprain in her legs during the rehearsals. Then she didn’t perform in the party. 7.On the eighteenth birthday of Kajal both the parties to alter the contract that defendant will repay the amount in EMIs of 10,000/per month. Defendant later found that the const of party house and swimming pool was done very badly; low quality material was used in the constr. 8.She estimated that the const would not have cost more than 3,50,000, to Mr. Ajay. Kajal dispose-off the property in Rs.9,00,000 without giving single penny to Plaintiff because of his foul play in construction. Plaintiff started to put enormous pressure on Defendant to recover the money. But he couldn’t recover after waiting for reasonable time, so Mr. Ajay gave notice for repayment within 15 days, but no reply was given by Kajal and hence this suit. 7
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The Learned Civil Judge of the District Court of Delhi has the inherent jurisdiction to try, entertain and dispose the present case by virtue of its pecuniary jurisdiction, where in Delhi the Court of Learned Civil Judge has the jurisdiction to try suit in which the amount claimed does not exceed a sum of Rupees 3 lakhs. 8
STATEMENT OF ARGUMENTS
ISSUE 1.Whether the 1st^ and 2nd^ contract are valid or not? The first contract is a case of misrepresentation and Mr. Ajay on humanity ground altered the contract and agreed to a new contract and amount to be paid with Ms Kajal. The contract entered on Ms. Kajal’s 18th^ birthday is valid and should be honoured. It has all the essential elements of being a valid contract. And the defendant has achieved majority and is legally bound to pay the money as agreed. There is no case for lack of funds since she disposed the property and has enough money to pay the plaintiff. ISSUE2. Whether there is a breach of contract under Indian Contact Act 1872 or not? A breach of contract occurs when a party to a contract fails to fullfill its obligations, whether partially or wholly, as described in the contract, or communicates an intent to fail the obligation or otherwise appears not to be able to perform its obligation under the contract. Where there is a breach of contract, the resulting damages will have to be paid by the party breaching the contract to the aggrieved party. In the above case kajal failed to fulfill the contract three times , first , when she failed to pay the sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- after the completion of her film which she promised to Mr. Ajay. Second, when Mr. Ajay agreed on to finish her debt if she agrees on to dance in her party in which she failed again.And at last when both agreed on humanity grounds agreed to alter the contract with Rs. 10,000/- Easy Monthly Installments (EMIs) summing up to the original debt of Rs. 300000/- but kajal failed to do the same and also decided to dispose of the property without notifying to Mr. Ajay and also decided not to give a single penny to him and resulting in breach of the contract. So clearly, there was a breach of contract by the plantiff (Ms. Kajal) According to section 37 of the Indian Contract Act. 10
ISSUE3. Whether Plaintiff can recover money from Defendant?
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
11
the property without notifying to Mr. Ajay and also decided not to give a single penny to him and resulting in breach of the contract. The defendant is liable to pay the compen. to the plaintiff under section 73 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 :- Compen. for loss or damage caused by breach of contract.—When a contract has been broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive, from the party who has broken the contract, compen. for any loss or damage caused to him thereby, which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach, or which the parties knew, when they made the contract, to be likely to result from the breach of it. Explanation - In estimating the loss or damage arising from a breach of contract, the means which existed of remedying the inconvenience caused by the non- performance of the contract must be taken into account . RELATED CASE
. Leslie Ltd. V Sheill (1914) 3K.B. In this case, defendant obtained loans of 200$ from plantiff by fraudulently misrepresenting that he has attained the age of majority at the time of the contract and then refused to pay the money by taking the advantage of being a minor. So the defendent sued him to recover the money. Court later held that the minor is entitled to repudiate the tractions on attaining the age of majority. 13
GIVEN CASE
In this case, defendant entred into a contract with a plantiff by falsly representing her age as majority and obtained loan of Rs. 30,00,000/- from the plantiff with a promise of repaying it later but was not able to repay it. Also both the parties on humanity ground altered the contract when the defendant attaines the age of majority and again she promised to pay the amount but later refuses. So , the defendant here is liable to pay the amount as now she has attained the age of majority and therefore the court held that the minor is entitled to repudiate the tractions on attaining the age of majority. RELATED CASES
- Mohri Bibee V/S Dharmodas Ghose [1] 1903
- Khan Gul Vs. Lakha Singh AIR 1928 Lah 609 ISSUE3.Whether Plaintiff can recover money from Defendant? 14
