Nitesh Gupta is constructing his house. For this purpose, he entered in a contract with M/s Baba Brick House to supply of 10,000 bricks on 12th August 2023. M/s Baba Brick House has two Lorries of 5,000 brick capacity. On 12th August 2023, one of the Lorries was not in working condition so M/s Baba Brick House supplied only 5,000 bricks and promised Nitesh Gupta to supply rest 5,000 bricks on next day. Nitesh Gupta wants to cancel the contract, as M/s Baba Brick House did not supply the bricks as per the contract. M/s Baba Brick House gave the plea that no fault has been made from its part, hence contract should not be cancelled. In this situation, whether Nitesh Gupta can avoid the contract under Indian Contract Act, 1872? OR Rahul is manufacturer of jute bags. He contracted with Sonia to supply raw jute for the purpose of making bags. Rahul informed Sonia that production process of jute bags would start from 27.06.2024 but Sonia must supply raw jute till 25.06.2024 so that quality verifications can be done in next two days. Sonia supplied the jute on 27.06.2024 and informed Rahul that she couldn’t supply on 25.06.2024 due to some unavoidable reasons and she also assured that quality measures were not anyway compromised in supplies. But Rahul wanted to avoid the contract as he was not given opportunity to examine the goods. In light of provisions of Indian Contract Act, 1872, state whether Rahul can avoid the contract?

“Performance of Contract” means fulfilment of obligations to the contract. According to Section 37 of Indian Contract Act, 1872, the parties to a contract must either perform, or offer to perform, their respective promises unless such performance is dispensed with or excused under the provisions of the Contract Act or of any other law. Further, the performance should be for whole obligations. Part delivery cannot be considered as valid performance. In the instant case, Nitesh Gupta contracted with M/s Baba Brick House to supply of 10,000 bricks on 12th August 2023. M/s Baba Brick House had only two Lorries of 5,000 brick capacity. But on the agreed date one lorry was not in working condition so only 5,000 bricks were supplied on 12th August 2023 and promised to supply rest 5,000 bricks on next day. After taking into account the above provisions and facts, Plea of M/s Baba Brick House cannot be considered. Performance should be for whole obligation. Hence, part performance by M/s Baba Brick House cannot be taken as valid performance. Nitesh Gupta is right in avoiding the contract. OR In the instant case, Rahul, a manufacturer of jute bags entered in a contract with Sonia to supply raw jute with the instructions that he needs raw jute till 25.06.2024 so that quality verifications can be done in next two days. But Sonia supplied the jute on 27.06.2024 with the information that she couldn’t supply on 25.06.2024 due to some unavoidable reasons. On the basis of the facts of the case, Rahul was not given a proper opportunity to examine the goods at the time of performance. This cannot be considered as valid performance by Sonia. Hence, Rahul can avoid the contract entered with Sonia.