Statement of Facts
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Mr.Saurav Shukla and Mr.Rahul Reddy, businessmen from Hyderabad entered into a 1year contract from 1st April 2008 to March 2009 with each other.
2. According to the contract Mr.Saurav would supply goods to Mr.Rahul by 5th of every month, the payment of which should be received by the 10th of the same month.
3. They couldn’t have more than 1 supplier for the same kind of goods at the same time.
4. On 1st February, 2009 they met at a common friend’s party where Mr.Rahul proposed to Mr.Saurav for renewal of the contract to which Mr.Saurav informed about his trip to the States.
5. They agreed that if Mr.Saurav does not go to the States they wil renew the contract the terms of which will remain unaltered.
6. On !st March, 2009, Mr.Saurav was informed that his visa application had been rejected.
7. He made another visa application on 10th March, 2009 for a duration of 10 days which was approved a week later.
8. On 20th March, 2009, Mr.Saurav left for States without communicating the same to Mr.Rahul.
9. On 25th March, 2009, Mr.Rahul entered into a 1 year contract with another supplier of stationery goods.
10. Mr.Saurav came to Mumbai on 30th March and reached Hyderabad on 31st March at 11pm and contacted Mr.Rahul the very next day and was informed that he had already entered into a new contract with another supplier.
11. Mr.Saurav sued Mr.Rahul for breach of contract. ISSUES RAISED
1. Whether the new contract entered into by the plaintiff and the defendant after the completion of the old contract ie from April 2008 to March 2009 is a contingent contract?
2. Whether the contract is still enforceable if the event on which the contract is collateral does not take place?
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
1. The contract entered into by Mr.Saurav Shukla and Mr.Rahul Reddy IS A CONTINGENT CONTRACT under section 31 of The Indian Contract Act 1872.
2. The contract is NOT enforceable if the event on which the contract is
1. Mr.Saurav Shukla and Mr.Rahul Reddy, businessmen from Hyderabad entered into a 1year contract from 1st April 2008 to March 2009 with each other.
2. According to the contract Mr.Saurav would supply goods to Mr.Rahul by 5th of every month, the payment of which should be received by the 10th of the same month.
3. They couldn’t have more than 1 supplier for the same kind of goods at the same time.
4. On 1st February, 2009 they met at a common friend’s party where Mr.Rahul proposed to Mr.Saurav for renewal of the contract to which Mr.Saurav informed about his trip to the States.
5. They agreed that if Mr.Saurav does not go to the States they wil renew the contract the terms of which will remain unaltered.
6. On !st March, 2009, Mr.Saurav was informed that his visa application had been rejected.
7. He made another visa application on 10th March, 2009 for a duration of 10 days which was approved a week later.
8. On 20th March, 2009, Mr.Saurav left for States without communicating the same to Mr.Rahul.
9. On 25th March, 2009, Mr.Rahul entered into a 1 year contract with another supplier of stationery goods.
10. Mr.Saurav came to Mumbai on 30th March and reached Hyderabad on 31st March at 11pm and contacted Mr.Rahul the very next day and was informed that he had already entered into a new contract with another supplier.
11. Mr.Saurav sued Mr.Rahul for breach of contract. ISSUES RAISED
1. Whether the new contract entered into by the plaintiff and the defendant after the completion of the old contract ie from April 2008 to March 2009 is a contingent contract?
2. Whether the contract is still enforceable if the event on which the contract is collateral does not take place?
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
1. The contract entered into by Mr.Saurav Shukla and Mr.Rahul Reddy IS A CONTINGENT CONTRACT under section 31 of The Indian Contract Act 1872.
2. The contract is NOT enforceable if the event on which the contract is