{"id":340851,"date":"2025-02-09T11:00:21","date_gmt":"2025-02-09T05:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=340851"},"modified":"2025-02-09T10:55:19","modified_gmt":"2025-02-09T05:25:19","slug":"proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/","title":{"rendered":"NRJ Series| Proposal with several parts must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer and not a contract [(1954) 2 SCC 728]"},"content":{"rendered":"<style>\n.animate-charcter{background-image: linear-gradient(-225deg, #231557 0%, #44107a 29%, #ff1361 67%, #fff800 100%); background-size: 200% auto; -webkit-background-clip: text; -webkit-text-fill-color: transparent; animation: textclip 0s linear infinite;}\n@keyframes textclip {to {background-position: 200% center;}}\n<\/style>\n<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Supreme Court:<\/span> In an appeal wherein, the issue for consideration was whether a concluded contract was arrived at between the parties, the three-Judges Bench of B.K. Mukherjea, <span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">Vivian Bose<\/span>* and B. Jagannadhadas, JJ., observed that there was more in the proposals than Para A and the three options, which was acknowledged by the appellants. The Supreme Court stated that it was beyond dispute that if a proposal contained Items A, B and C (which must be accepted, or rejected in their entirety) and out of them, Para A conferred rights and privileges on the party to whom the offer was made while B and C imposed obligations and liabilities, then, if the other side stated &#8220;I accept your offer contained in A&#8221; there was no contract. It would, at best, a counter-offer.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Thus, the Supreme Court agreed with the High Court and stated that there was no ambiguity and could not look at the subsequent correspondence and conduct of the parties.<\/p>\n<h3>Background<\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">In the present case, the appellants were a father and two sons. The respondents were also a father and two sons. Respondents 4 and 5 were the respective wives of the two sons on the respondents&#8217; side. The two fathers entered into a partnership and carried on business at Bombay, Calcutta, Madras and Karachi as iron and hardware merchants under the name and style of Murlimal Santram &amp; Co. In March 1947 the four sons were admitted to the partnership, each side again having equal shares. This was called as the partnership firm.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">In 1948, the three appellants and Respondent 1, his son, Respondent 2 and this son&#8217;s wife, and one R.V. Joshi formed a private limited company called Murlimal Santram &amp; Co., (Bombay) (&#8216;Bombay Company&#8217;). This company bought and took over all the stock-in-trade of the partnership firm in Bombay.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">In 1949, a similar limited company consisting of the Appellants 1, 2 and Respondent 1 and his son, Respondent 3 and this son&#8217;s wife, Respondent 5, was formed at Madras. It was called Murlimal Santram &amp; Co. (Madras) (&#8216;Madras Company&#8217;). In 1950, a similar private limited company was started in Calcutta, with the name Murlimal Santram &amp; Co. (Calcutta) (&#8216;Calcutta Company&#8217;). It consisted of the Appellants 1, 3 and Respondents 1, 2 and 4.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">As a result of the various transactions, the partnership firm ceased to do business, but it remained in being and owned several properties and indeed continued to purchase properties down to the year 1951. In January 1951, disputes arose between the partners in the partnership firm, so they decided to wind up the partnership and dissolve it.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The appellants&#8217; case was that the negotiations about this culminated in the respondents making appellants certain offer on 22-1-1951. The appellants stated that they accepted this offer by a telegram and letter dated 23-1-1951 and that thereupon a contract sprang into being. It was this contract which the appellants seek to enforce in this suit. The only question which had so far been tried was a preliminary question whether there was a concluded contract. The appellants said &#8220;Yes&#8221; and the respondents said &#8220;No&#8221;. Both the lower courts agree with the respondents. Hence, the present appeal. The issue in the present case was whether a concluded contract was arrived at between the parties.<\/p>\n<h3>Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/h3>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Supreme Court observed that there was more in the proposals than Para A and the three options. There were the conditions in the preamble. Then there was, Para B and there were further conditions set out in the &#8220;Further Clarification&#8221; part of the document. The Supreme Court stated that it was beyond dispute that if a proposal contained Items A, B and C (which must be accepted, or rejected in their entirety) and out of them, Para A conferred rights and privileges on the party to whom the offer was made while B and C imposed obligations and liabilities, then, if the other side stated &#8220;I accept your offer contained in A&#8221; there was no contract. Thus, it would, at best, a counter-offer.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Supreme Court observed that the appellants relied very strongly on the concluding words of the acceptance, which stated that, &#8220;as we have accepted your proposal the concluded contract has now resulted. Please therefore see that the terms of this contract are carried out.&#8221; The Supreme Court stated that a contract could not arise simply because one party chooses to say that it had.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Supreme Court stated that passage relied on by the appellants, could not be read apart from the preceding passages which qualify its more general terms, and there, the stress throughout was on Para A alone on the &#8220;Property side&#8221; and on the three options on the &#8220;Cash side&#8221;. Para B was ignored, the &#8220;Further clarification&#8221; was ignored and so was the preamble.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">Thus, the Supreme Court agreed with the High Court and stated that there was no ambiguity and could not look at the subsequent correspondence and conduct of the parties.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Kishandas Murlimal v. Doongermal Bachumal Futnani, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/Members\/NoteView.aspx?enc=SlRYVC05MDAxOTM0NzkyJiYmJiY0MCYmJiYmU2VhcmNoJiYmJiZmdWxsc2NyZWVuJiYmJiZmYWxzZSYmJiYmKDE5NTQpIDIgU0NDIDcyOCYmJiYmUGhyYXNlJiYmJiZGaW5kQnlDaXRhdGlvbiYmJiYmZmFsc2U=\" target=\"_blank\">(1954) 2 SCC 728<\/a>, decided on 22-09-1954<\/span>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-indent: 18pt;\"><strong><span style=\"color: #000080;\">*Judgment authored by: Justice Vivian Bose<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the Appellants:<\/span> P.R. Das, Dr Bakshi Tek Chand, M.V. Desai and A.K. Sen, Senior Advocates (Rajinder Narain, Advocate, with them)<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt; margin-bottom: 3%;\"><span style=\"font-weight: bold;\">For the Respondents:<\/span> M.C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India, C.K. Daphtary, Solicitor General of India (M\/s Praful N. Bhagwati and I.N. Shroff, Advocates, with them)<\/p>\n<p style=\"font-weight: bold;\">**Note: What constitutes a contract<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 1%;\">Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001527363\" target=\"_blank\">2(h)<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726954\" target=\"_blank\">Contract Act, 1872<\/a> (&#8216;the Act&#8217;) defines the term contract. As per the provision, a contract is an agreement enforceable by law. Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001527251\" target=\"_blank\">10<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726954\" target=\"_blank\">Act<\/a> provides for what agreements are contracts. The provision states that all agreements are contracts, if they are made by the free consent of parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and are not hereby expressly declared to be void. In <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Union of India<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Bhim Sen Walaiti Ram<\/span>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/Members\/NoteView.aspx?enc=KDE5NjkpIDMgU0NDIDE0NiYmJiYmNDAmJiYmJlNlYXJjaFBhZ2UjdW5kZWZpbmVk\" target=\"_blank\">(1969) 3 SCC 146<\/a>, it was held that<\/p>\n<p class=\"animate-charcter\" style=\"margin-bottom: 3%; margin-left: 36pt; font-style: italic;\">&#8220;an acceptance of an offer may be either absolute or conditional. If the acceptance is conditional the offer can be withdrawn at any moment until absolute acceptance has taken place.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 1%;\">Further, in <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Food Corporation of India<\/span> v. <span style=\"font-style: italic;\">Ram Kesh Yadav<\/span>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/Members\/NoteView.aspx?enc=SlRYVC0wMDAxNTI3NDg1JiYmJiY0MCYmJiYmU2VhcmNoUGFnZSN1bmRlZmluZWQ=\" target=\"_blank\">(2007) 9 SCC 531<\/a>, it was held that<\/p>\n<p class=\"animate-charcter\" style=\"margin-bottom: 3%; margin-left: 36pt; font-style: italic;\">&#8220;when an offer is conditional, the offeree has the choice of either accepting the conditional offer, or rejecting the conditional offer, or making a counter-offer. But what the offeree cannot do, when an offer is conditional, is to accept a part of the offer which results in performance by the offeror and then reject the condition subject to which the offer is made.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p style=\"font-style: italic;\">This report covers the Supreme Court&#8217;s Never Reported Judgment on what constitutes as a contract, dating back to the year 1954.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67520,"featured_media":340852,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,58675],"tags":[78466,32083,3174,50100,44738,71218,72650,72210,58925,73118,78465,34923,5363],"class_list":["post-340851","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-scc-never-reported-judgments-supreme-court","tag-absolute-acceptance","tag-acceptance","tag-contract","tag-contract-act-1872","tag-counter-offer","tag-justice-b-jagannadhadas","tag-justice-b-k-mukherjea","tag-justice-vivian-bose","tag-never-reported-judgment","tag-nrj-series","tag-part-acceptance","tag-proposal","tag-supreme-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Supreme Court&#039;s Never Reported Judgment on what constitutes a contract | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Supreme Court stated that proposal with several parts, must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer, and not a contract.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"NRJ Series| Proposal with several parts must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer and not a contract [(1954) 2 SCC 728]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court stated that proposal with several parts, must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer, and not a contract.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-02-09T05:30:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/contract-counter-offer-acceptance.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arushi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"NRJ Series| Proposal with several parts must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer and not a contract [(1954) 2 SCC 728]\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arushi\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on what constitutes a contract | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/contract-counter-offer-acceptance.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-02-09T05:30:21+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76\"},\"description\":\"Supreme Court stated that proposal with several parts, must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer, and not a contract.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/contract-counter-offer-acceptance.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/contract-counter-offer-acceptance.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"contract counter-offer acceptance\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"NRJ Series| Proposal with several parts must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer and not a contract [(1954) 2 SCC 728]\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76\",\"name\":\"Arushi\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arushi\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/arushi\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on what constitutes a contract | SCC Times","description":"Supreme Court stated that proposal with several parts, must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer, and not a contract.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"NRJ Series| Proposal with several parts must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer and not a contract [(1954) 2 SCC 728]","og_description":"Supreme Court stated that proposal with several parts, must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer, and not a contract.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-02-09T05:30:21+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/contract-counter-offer-acceptance.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arushi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"NRJ Series| Proposal with several parts must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer and not a contract [(1954) 2 SCC 728]","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arushi","Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/","name":"Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on what constitutes a contract | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/contract-counter-offer-acceptance.webp","datePublished":"2025-02-09T05:30:21+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76"},"description":"Supreme Court stated that proposal with several parts, must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer, and not a contract.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/contract-counter-offer-acceptance.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/contract-counter-offer-acceptance.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"contract counter-offer acceptance"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/09\/proposal-with-several-parts-must-be-accepted-rejected-entirely-accepting-one-part-will-be-counter-offer-not-contract\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"NRJ Series| Proposal with several parts must be accepted\/rejected in its entirety; acceptance of one part will at best be counter-offer and not a contract [(1954) 2 SCC 728]"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76","name":"Arushi","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arushi"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/arushi\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/contract-counter-offer-acceptance.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":293277,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/27\/5-high-courts-to-get-new-chief-justices\/","url_meta":{"origin":340851,"position":0},"title":"5 High Courts to get new Chief Justices","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 27, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"KERALA HIGH COURT \u21aa Shri Justice Sarasa Venkatanarayana Bhatti, Judge, Kerala High Court, appointed as the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court with effect from the date he assumes charge of his office. HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT \u21aa\u00a0Shri Justice Mamidanna Satya Ratna Sri Ramachandra Rao, Judge, Punjab & Haryana\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Appointments &amp; Transfers&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Appointments &amp; Transfers","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/appointments\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"new chief justices of high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/new-chief-justices-of-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/new-chief-justices-of-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/new-chief-justices-of-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/new-chief-justices-of-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":241930,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/01\/07\/can-a-contract-be-considered-concluded-if-the-acceptor-adds-a-new-condition-while-accepting-an-offer-supreme-court-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":340851,"position":1},"title":"Can a conditional acceptance of an offer be considered a concluded contract? Supreme Court answers","author":"Editor","date":"January 7, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWith the greatest of respect, the High Court has cursorily dealt with the contentions of the Appellant and has not even discussed the cases that had been cited on behalf of the Appellant.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":333953,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/10\/27\/sc-does-not-interfere-concurrent-findings-of-fact-phrases-conscience-of-court-satisfied-cannot-convert-question-of-fact-to-law\/","url_meta":{"origin":340851,"position":2},"title":"NRJ Series | SC normally does not interfere with concurrent findings of fact; phrases like \u201cconscience of Court being satisfied\u201d cannot convert question of fact into law [(1954) 1 SCC 688]","author":"Arushi","date":"October 27, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on, Supreme Court\u2019s interference in concurrent findings of fact, dating back to the year 1954.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Cases Reported&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Supreme Court's interference in concurrent findings of fact","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Supreme-Courts-interference-in-concurrent-findings-of-fact.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Supreme-Courts-interference-in-concurrent-findings-of-fact.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Supreme-Courts-interference-in-concurrent-findings-of-fact.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Supreme-Courts-interference-in-concurrent-findings-of-fact.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":373242,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/20\/orissa-hc-bars-limitation-act-computation-in-contractual-termination\/","url_meta":{"origin":340851,"position":3},"title":"Orissa High Court bars application of Limitation Act computation method to contractual termination clauses","author":"Soumya Yadav","date":"January 20, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWhether the termination would take effect from a particular date has no nexus to the period provided for issuance of the notice.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Limitation Act computation in contractual termination","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Limitation-Act-computation-in-contractual-termination.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Limitation-Act-computation-in-contractual-termination.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Limitation-Act-computation-in-contractual-termination.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Limitation-Act-computation-in-contractual-termination.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":339756,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/26\/sc-never-reported-judgment-on-suit-for-recovery-of-possession\/","url_meta":{"origin":340851,"position":4},"title":"NRJ Series | When SC remitted case of recovery of possession to Trial Court for rehearing as per general law, since customary law was only applicable to ryots of village [(1954) 2 SCC 699]","author":"Arushi","date":"January 26, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"This report covers the Supreme Court's Never Reported Judgment on suit for recovery of possession, dating back to the year 1954.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Cases Reported&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"suit for recovery of possession","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/shared-image-_11_.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/shared-image-_11_.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/shared-image-_11_.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/shared-image-_11_.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":333190,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/10\/17\/justice-sanjiv-khanna-cji-name-recommended-sc-legal-news-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":340851,"position":5},"title":"Who is Justice Sanjiv Khanna, the name recommended by CJI Chandrachud as his successor?","author":"Sucheta","date":"October 17, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice Sanjiv Khanna\u2019s name has been recommended as next Chief Justice of India as per the seniority rule.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Hot Off The Press&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Hot Off The Press","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/hot_off_the_press\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"CJI Chandrachud successor Justice Sanjiv Khanna","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/CJI-Chandrachud-successor-Justice-Sanjiv-Khanna.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/CJI-Chandrachud-successor-Justice-Sanjiv-Khanna.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/CJI-Chandrachud-successor-Justice-Sanjiv-Khanna.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/CJI-Chandrachud-successor-Justice-Sanjiv-Khanna.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/340851","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67520"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=340851"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/340851\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/340852"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=340851"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=340851"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=340851"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}