Docsity
Docsity
Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips
Sell on Docsity
Sell on Docsity
Docsity AI
Docsity AI
Log inSign up

Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity

Find documents

Prepare for your exams with the study notes shared by other students like you on Docsity

Search for your university

Find the specific documents for your university's exams

Docsity AINEW

Summarize your documents, ask them questions, convert them into quizzes and concept maps

Explore questions

Clear up your doubts by reading the answers to questions asked by your fellow students

Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan

Share documents
download point icon20 Points

For each uploaded document

Answer questions
download point icon5 Points

For each given answer (max 1 per day)

All the ways to get free points
Get points immediately

Choose a premium plan with all the points you need

Study Opportunities

Choose your next study program

Get in touch with the best universities in the world. Search through thousands of universities and official partners

Community

Ask the community

Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts

Free resources

Our save-the-student-ebooks!

Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors

second semester memorial, Assignments of Contract Law

Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha UniversityContract Law

memorial of the constitutional law

Typology: Assignments

2020/2021

Uploaded on 01/05/2021

maitray-singh
maitray-singh 🇮🇳

4 documents

1 / 14

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
BBA LLB (II SEMESTER) 2019-2020
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
LUCKNOW
Orange Electronics -Plaintiff
v.
Mr. Abhinav Mishra - Defendent
ON SUBMISSION TO THE REGISTRY OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF LUCKNOW
MEMORIAL DRAWN AND SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE
DEFENDANT
Maitray Singh Rathi
01419103519
BBA-LLB 2
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9
pfa
pfd
pfe

Partial preview of the text

Download second semester memorial and more Assignments Contract Law in PDF only on Docsity!

BBA LLB (II SEMESTER) 2019-

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF

LUCKNOW

Orange Electronics -Plaintiff v. Mr. Abhinav Mishra - Defendent ON SUBMISSION TO THE REGISTRY OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF LUCKNOW MEMORIAL DRAWN AND SUBMITTED ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT Maitray Singh Rathi 01419103519 BBA-LLB 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S. NO CONTENT

S

PAGE NO.

List of abbreviations List of sources or authorities Statement of jurisdiction Statement of facts Issues raised Summary of arguments Arguments advanced Prayer

LIST OF SOURCES

STATUTES:-

  1. THE Indian Contract Act, 1872
  2. The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
  3. Indian Majority Act, 1872
  4. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 CASES:- Mohri Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose (1903) 30 LA 114 (P.C) BOOKS:- · Avtarsingh, Law of Contract and Specific Relief Act, Eastern book co. , 2013 · Indian Contract Act – Dr.R.K.Bangia, Allahabad Law Agency (2016 Edition)

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Defendant humbly submits this memorandum in response to the suit filed before this

honourable court. The suit filed invokes its jurisdiction under sec. 9 of the Code of Civil

Procedure, 1908.

  1. The company gave a notice to Abhinav to return the device which was given to him to develop the app and pay compensation for the losses suffered by the company which was denied by him.
  2. On 12.12.2009 the company filed a civil suit for damages and recovery of the device and the money given against Abhinav in the court of Lucknow, accusing Abhinav of breach of contract.

ISSUES RAISED

ISSUE I: Whether the Lucknow court has jurisdiction?

ISSUE II: Whether there is a valid contract between Abhinav and Orange

Electronics?

ISSUE III: Whether there is breach of contract and Abhinav is liable to pay

damages and return the device?

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

ISSUE 1

It is humbly submitted that there does not exist jurisdiction of Lucknow court in the

given case of Orange Electronics V. Mr. Abhinav.

in section 20 of ‘The Code of Civil Procedure 1908’ it is said that suits to be instituted

where defendants reside or cause of action arises.

The place of residence of the defendant in the given case is Delhi so it is quite apparent

that only the delhi court has the jurisdiction in the given case.

the place where the defendant carries his or her business can also be the criteria for the

jurisdiction of the case. In the given case the place where the defendant carries on

business is Delhi as he works from his home as he does not have a dedicated office in

which his business takes place.

Where the cause of action arises is the criteria according to which jurisdiction can be

decided. Since the contract was signed by him in Delhi as the contract was sent to him by

post by the company, so the lucknow court does not have jurisdiction in the given case.

In all the given criteria the Lucknow court has no jurisdiction in the given case to hear

the case.

ISSUE 2

It is humbly submitted that there does not exist a valid contract between Orange Electronics

and Mr. Abhinav Mishra, as on the date of execution of the contract as the age of the

defendant was below the age of majority i.e. 18 years.

Section 3 of Indian Majority act, 1872 provides:

“Every person domiciled in India shall attain the age of majority on his completing the age

of eighteen years and not before.”

Further section 11 of the Indian Contract Act provides:

“Every person is competent to contract who is of the age of majority according to the law to

which he subject, and who is of sound mind and is not disqualified from contractio=ng by

any law to which he is subject.”

As per section 3 of the Indian Majority Act, 1872 every person domiciled in India shall

attain the age of majority on his completing the age of eighteen years and not before that. In

the present case, the age of the Defendant on the date commencement of the contract was 17

years 6 months and 21 days. Therefore as on the date of the commencement of the contract

the defendant has not attained the age of majority and was a minor. Further, as per Section

11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 a minor is not competent to enter into an contract

therefore the contract entered by Mr. Abhinav Mishra is void ab intio and cannot be

considered as a valid contract in the eyes of law.

In the case of Mohri Bibee V. Dharmodas Ghose^1 the privy council deal with the similar

issue of a contract by a minor wherein it was held that any contract entered into by a minor

was void.

ISSUE 3

1 7 CWN 441; 30 M.I.A 114

In the given case since there does not exist a contract between the two parties there cannot be

breach of contract. the law of Estoppel given in the Sec. 115, of the Indian Evidence Act,

1872 does not apply on the given case as the defendant acted in good faith as there was no

mentioning of a minimum age in the advertisement and even during the interview which was

taken by the vise president of the company it is not stated that it was asked by the vise

president the age of Mr. Abhinav and that he misrepresented his age. In the case of Mohori

Bibee V. Dharmodas Ghose it was made clear that a minor cannot be asked to pay

compensation under section 64, 65, and 70. These section provides different scenarios under

which the defendant is bound to pay back compensation to the plaintiff under unjust benefit

received by the defendant. The plaintiff cannot get relief even under the Specific Relief Act,

PRAYER

In the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and the authorities

cited, the counsel for the defendant humbly prays to the Hon’ble court to

dismiss the suit and relief the defendant from paying any of the damages for

the breach of contract.

And pass any order that this Hon’ble court may deem fit in the interest of

justice, equity, and good conscience.

And for the act of kindness, the counsel for the defendant shall duty bound

forever. Respectfully submitted Date- …… March, 20 20

( Signature of the counsel for the defendant)