Successful Completion of Guest Lecture in MNLU Aurangabad.

Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad Guest Lecture



Maharashtra National Law University, Aurangabad Lecture Series on Contract Law hosted by Justice S.V. Gangapurwala, Judge, High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad on 7Th April 2018 at MNLU-A Classroom. He spoke on the topic of “The Law Of Contract, 1872.”

Justice Sanjay Vijaykumar Gangapurwala started practice in the year 1985 and practiced in trial Court, High Court and Debt Recovery Tribunal. He was advocate for various Financial Institutions, many Corporate bodies and Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University. He was Honorary part time lecturer in M.P. Law College since 1991 till date of elevation as Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court on 13th March 2010.

Justice S.V. Gangapurwala Sir began his lecture from the origin of the Contracts in India. And then he spoke about Contract law and various facets of Contracts in India. He spoke about the Aims and objective behind the Law of Contract, 1872.

Moving to the Bare Act next, he taught students the interpretations of the Act. He spoke about the importance of the Contract law in India. He quote many good authors to make student understand about the Law.

He also tell student “The Indian Contract Act was passed in the year 1872 and it came into force on the 1st day of September, 1872. The Act extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir. It consists of 238 sections. It has been divided into 10 chapters. Chapter VII of the Contract Act is wholly repealed by the Indian Sale of Goods Act, 1930 (vide section 65). The Contract Act deals with particular contracts in separate chapters.”

He then spoke about the aspect of contract law when two or more countries are involved, what law will prevails. He spoke “ In case of a contract in which two or more countries are involved in respect of its performance, questions arise as to the law of which country would govern such a contract. In the first instance, the law which would govern such a contract would be the law expressed by the parties themselves in the contract. In the absence of an expressed intention, the rule to apply is to infer an intention from the terms and nature of the contract and the general circumstances of the case. Such circumstances may be

(i) the country in which the contract was entered into or

(ii) The country where the payment was to be made. In such a contract, if a payment is to be made, it should be of the legal tender governing the country in which payment is to be made.”

He then discuss some landmark case law regarding Contracts. Starting with :

Balfour vs. Balfour (King’s Bench-1919)

Rule of Law: Where parties to the contract do not intend to create a binding agreement, the agreement cannot be enforced.

Carlill vs. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co (Court of Appeal-1892)

Rule of Law: A General offer may be accepted by any person from among the public who has the knowledge of it. The performance of conditions of an offer will amount to acceptance.

Lalman Shukla vs. Gauri Dutt (Allahabad High Court-1913)

Rule of Law: Offer must be communicated. An action without the knowledge of the proposal is no acceptance.

Mohori Bibee vs. Dharmodas Ghose (Privy Council-1903)

Rule of Law: A contract with a minor is void ab initio.

He goes on discussing landmark case law and its importance in Law of Contract and how the scenario of Law of Contract changed due to this landmark case laws.

Lastly, he concluded his lecture by recalling what he has delivered in his lecture in a very cohesive manner. He expressed his hope that law schools such as
MNLU-A would take the lead and join hands with the formal legal setup to strengthen justice delivery in India.