In short, if the offer is accepted, then the contract is legally binding, this ensures that the acceptance once made can no longer be revoked. Because the offer is conditional, but acceptance cannot be conditional. But in our Indian contract law, acceptance can be revoked by fast means of communication. So that the target recipient can read it before it is accepted. One of the most absurd but practical aspects of the postal rule is that if the acceptance letter sent by the target recipient, here B, is delayed, lost or possibly destroyed during transmission, the contract would come into force, since the acceptance has already come into play as soon as the acceptance letter has been published by the target recipient. Therefore, the supplier, here A, is bound to contractual liability even without knowledge of the acceptance of the contract. In Entores Ltd.c. Miles Far East Corpn. , Denning C.J.
stated that the postal rule cannot be applied to immediate modes of communication such as telephone and telex. If a phone line “fell dead” just before the target recipient said “yes”, it would be absurd to assume that the contract was concluded and that the parties would not have to remember. The same was true of telex. Since the contract was therefore concluded only at the time and place where the telex was received, the place of foundation was London. In summary, the word “acceptance” is broadly defined in our Indian Contract Act of 1872 under section 2(b). It says, “If the person to whom the proposal is submitted indicates his or her consent, the proposal is designated as accepted.” We have two types of communication modes for the purpose of forming contracts: instantaneous modes and non-momentary modes. Instant modes include phone and telex, where the parties are supposed to be in direct contact, i.e. Face to face with each other.
In the case of such types of communication, the acceptance must be communicated to the supplier in order to conclude a contract. Non-instant modes include post and telegraph. In such a mode, the acceptance does not have to be communicated to the supplier. This rule of assumption states that it is not enough to get a person to accept the offer, but also to convince him to do the same action. If this does not happen, it will not be considered a valid contract, e.B. The director of the airline accepted a draft contract for the delivery of new seats in the ship, but the manager did not give his consent to the supplier and, due to delays in delivery, the case was taken to court and the court said that there was no valid contract because there was no communication of acceptance by the airline manager. The communication of a proposal is the very first step towards the conclusion of a contract. A proposal can be made by different types, which are described below: The proposal is the very first step to conclude a contract.
The person who made the proposal is called the applicant, and the person for whom the proposal is made is called the promisor. The offer has reasonable opportunities to say “yes” or “no” to the supplier for its proposal. The communication of the proposal is complete when it comes to knowing the promisor. Dealing with the current modern mode of communication is currently a big topic. The problem becomes more complicated when communication is done via some modern media such as emails, phone calls, faxes and especially social media platforms on the Internet. The communication of electronic messages has been described in the Information Technology Act 2000, but does not address contracts entered into by such messages. If an offer is addressed to the other party (the target consignee), there is a constraint for the entry into force of the contract that this offer must be accepted by the target consignee and it must inform the supplier of its acceptance, otherwise it would be assumed that there has been no agreement of the spirits for the purpose of the entry into force of the contract. But at the same time, there is a condition that one can only accept the offer in its entirety and not conditionally. The proposal must contain a promise in which the promisor shows that if the proposal is accepted, something should or should not be done, should or should not be done. If a person intends to do or not to do something, but does not communicate it to his contracting party. Secondly, it is not considered a proposal.
In Lalman Sukla v. Gauri Dutt, “A” is a servant of “B”. `A` lost his nephew and he sent his servant `B` in search of the boy. `A` has published an announcement that anyone who finds his nephew will be rewarded. `B` found his nephew and later learned about the advertisement and claimed the reward. But his request failed, because to establish a contract there must be an acceptance of the proposal and without knowledge of the proposal, adoption cannot take place. A candidate must specify every word in his proposal that he wants to include in the contract, so he can leave nothing on the promises that he should understand himself. Article 4 means that “the notification of an acceptance to the applicant, when transferred to a course of transmission to him, is complete in order to be beyond the power of the acceptor and to the acceptor when it comes to the knowledge of the applicant”. Here it is said that it puts a transfer price, but no specific transfer is mentioned; So it includes all kinds of transmissions, even email and Facebook. Although e-mail or Facebook communications fall within the scope of Article 4, no specific rules are established, whether the postal rule or the instant communication rule is considered identical to e-mail and the Facebook contract. If someone sends a message via Facebook or email and the other party responds immediately, it seems to be instant communication.
On the other hand, if one person sends a message via email or Facebook Chat Messenger, but the other party does not respond immediately; then it seems to be a non-immediate communication in nature. When analyzing the type of communication by email and Facebook, immediate and non-instant communication is taken into account. (i) the lack of information on the types of communication in this section. the plaintiff in London made an offer to the defendants in Holland by telex and the acceptance was received by the plaintiff in London. A dispute arose over where the contract was concluded. The court ruled that the contract had been concluded in London, i.e. where the acceptance had been received. The court also made it very clear that the postal communication rule cannot be applied to immediate forms of communication.
Conditional acceptance, also known as legitimate acceptance, occurs when a person to whom an offer has been made notifies the bidder that they are willing to accept the offer, provided that certain changes are made to the status of the offer. This form of acceptance acts as a counter-offer. The original supplier must consider a counter-offer before a contract can be concluded between the parties. Therefore, the contract enters into force at the moment the letter of acceptance is published by the recipient. It is also not possible to revoke a contract concluded in immediate mode, unlike a contract concluded through the post office. In the case of the postal rule, the supplier usually becomes a victim. Therefore, I believe that the law on the immediate mode seems to be more concise and fairer than the postal rule. If any of the statements in which the proposals form the basis of acceptance and the basis of the contract between the parties and turns out to be a false statement, it will assume that the contract will become null and void and unenforceable. It is very important that the acceptance is communicated, as it cannot be considered a binding contract without acceptance.