Law Assignment Essay Example

acceptor, but not afterwards.

a) The revocation of acceptance was received by Ramaswami before the letter of acceptance.
Ans - Yes, the revocation of acceptance by Ramanathan (the acceptor) is valid.
b) The revocation and the letter of acceptance were received together.
Ans - If Ramaswami opens the revocation first (which is usually the case with a rational person) and reads it, the acceptance is revoked. If he opens the letter first and reads it, revocation of acceptance is not possible as the contract has already been concluded.

Q3 - X agreed to become an assistant for 5 years to Y, a doctor practicing in Ludhiana. It was also agreed that during the term of the agreement, X would not practice on his own in Ludhiana. At the end of one year, X left Y's assistantship and started practicing on his own. Referring to the provisions of The Indian Contract Act of 1872.An individual can be restrained from making something if it falls under the category of restraint of trade, concern, or professional, as specified in section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. However, if the understanding is related to service and restricts the individual from working for any other employer to promote a directly competing business, it is not considered restraint of trade. Therefore, X can be prevented from practicing independently in Ludhiana through an injunction. Any agreement that explicitly states its nullity is not valid.

In another scenario, Akhilesh made an agreement with Shekhar to provide him with 5,000 bags manufactured in his mill. However, due to a worker strike, the bags could not be produced and Akhilesh failed to deliver them to Shekhar. The question is

whether Akhilesh can be exempted from liability under the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

According to Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, if the performance of a contract becomes impossible or improper after its formation, the contract becomes void. This is known as "supervening impossibility," which refers to impossibility that arises after the formation of the contract. However, impossibility of performance is generally not an excuse for non-performance. This means that when a person has promised to do something but circumstances make it impossible or impractical, they are still liable for their promise.he must execute his promise unless the Performance becomes perfectly impossible. Whether a promise becomes perfectly Impossible depends upon the facts of each instance. The public presentation does not go perfectly impossible on history of work stoppages.lockout and civil perturbations and the contract in such a instance is not discharged unless otherwise agreed by the parties to the contract. In this instance Mr. Akhilesh could not deliver the bags as promised because of work stoppage by the workers. This trouble in public presentation cannot be considered as impossible of performance drawing Section 56 and therefore Mr. Akhilesh is apt to Mr. Shekhar for negligence of contract.

Q5-Miss X. a movie actress agreed to work exclusively for a period of 2 years for a movie production company. However, during the said period she enters into a contract for another movie manufacturer. Discuss the rights of the aggrieved movie production company under The Indian Contract Act, 1872.

Answer: Where a party remarks a breach of negative term of a contract i.e., where he does something which he promised not to do, the aggrieved party

can go to court which may issue an order preventing him from doing what he promised not to do. Such an order of the court is known as injunction. Since Miss X has agreed to work exclusively for the movie production company for a period of two years.The movie production company, who feels wronged, can go to a tribunal to obtain an injunction that prevents Miss X from working for a different movie production company.