Ashish goes to super market to buy an Air Conditioner. He selects a branded Air Conditioner having a price tag of 40,000 after a discount of 3000.…
CA Foundation · Business Laws · MTP · January 2026
Ashish goes to super market to buy an Air Conditioner. He selects a branded Air Conditioner having a price tag of 40,000 after a discount of 3000. Ashish reaches at cash counter for making the payment, but cashier says, “Sorry sir, the discount was upto yesterday. There is no discount from today. Hence you have to pay - 43,000.” Ashish got angry and insists for 40,000. State with reasons whether under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, can Ashish enforce the cashier to sell at discounted price i.e.40,000?
Suggested Answer and Working Notes:
(i) An invitation to offer is different from offer. Quotations, menu cards, price tags, advertisements in newspaper for sale are not offer. These are merely invitations to public to make an offer. An invitation to offer is an act precedent to making an offer. Acceptance of an invitation to an offer does not result in the contract and only an offer emerges in the process of negotiation. In the instant case, Ashish reaches to super market and selects a Air Conditioner with a discounted price tag of 40,000 but cashier denied to sell at discounted price by saying that discount is closed from today and request to make full payment. But Ashish insists to purchase at discounted price. On the basis of above provisions and facts, the price tag with Air Conditioner was not offer. It is merely an invitation to offer. Hence, it is the Ashish who is making the offer not the super market. Cashier has right to reject the Ashish’s offer. Therefore, Ashish cannot enforce cashier to sell at discounted price. (ii) Agent's authority in an emergency (Section 189 of the Indian Contract Act,1872): An agent has authority, in an emergency, to do all such acts for the purpose of protecting his principal from loss as would be done by a person of ordinary prudence, in his own case, under similar circumstances. In the instant case, Rakesh, the agent, was handling perishable goods like ‘tomatoes’ and can decide the time, date and place of sale, not necessarily as per instructions of the Aswin, the principal, with the intention of protecting Aswin from losses. Here, Rakesh acts in an emergency as a man of ordinary prudence, so Aswin will not succeed against him for recovering the loss.
Topics: The Indian Contract Act, 1872
Related Questions in this Topic
- Some objects and consideration are unlawful. Define any six with reference to provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 187...
- In light of provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 answer the following: (i) Mr. S and Mr. R made contract wherein...
- Mr. Sohan, a wealthy individual provided a loan of ₹ 80,000 to Mr. Mukesh on 26th February, 2025. The borrower, Mr. Muke...
- (i) Mr. L let out his residential house to Mr. M for ₹ 50,000 p.m. for a period of one year. According to the Rent agree...
- Preeti, a minor, falsely representing her age, enters into an agreement with an authorised Laptop dealer Mr. Mittal, own...