JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

Faculty of Law

GENERAL AND SPECIFIC OFFER

Submitted by: - ARYAN

Submitted to: - Prof. RICHA KHARE

Course: - B.A. LL B (regular)

I semester 2023-28

Serial No: - 12
Student ID :- 202303393
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This is to certify that Aryan student of Jamia Millia Islamia University pursing B.A.
LLB (H) and currently in 1st year (I Semester) has successfully completed the
assignment of General and Specific Offers and submitted it to Prof. Richa Khare. I
would like to extend my special gratitude to my Contract Prof. Richa Khare, who gave
me the golden opportunity to do this insightful project on offers. Through this process I
was able to understand the intricacies of law and do legal research in a more fine
manner for the first time. I would also like to thank my parents and friends who helped
me in finalizing this project and identify the relevant websites and books to refer. I
would forever be obliged.

Thanking You

ARYAN

B.A. LLB (H) 1ST YEAR

 1. INTRODUCTION

The topic of this project is “General and Specific Offer”. This project in particular
envisages to explain the topic in a detailed manner. Firstly, the Conceptual meaning,
which includes under this head, the legal intricacies related to all kinds of offers is
explained in depth. Secondly, special focus is given to General and Specific offer and
the various landmark cases of the English and Indian Jurisdiction has been elucidated
and differentiated from each other.

1.1 Conceptual meaning

An offer or a proposal is the first step towards the initiation of a contract.1 The person
who makes an offer or a proposal is called an offeror or a proposer likewise. The
Indian Contract Act (1872) quotes it as following:

“When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from

doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or
abstinence, he is said to make a proposal”2

In simpler words, an offer is a willingness or abstinence for committing an act. The

terms “offer and “proposal” are used interchangeably. When the person to whom the
offer is made signifies his assent thereto, the offer is said to be accepted and becomes a
promise.3
Illustrations
a) A offers B to sell his property. When B accepts the offer it becomes a promise.

b) Aman offers Navjot to sell his bike, but he asked him to reply with the acceptance in 6
days from the date of making the offer. Navjot does not responds within the 6 day period,
and approaches Aman with the acceptance and the money after the lapse of time. The
contract does not takes place between them because the prerequisite condition were not
fulfilled.
1 Harvey v Facey (1893) A.C.
2 The Indian Contract Act,1872 (act 9 of 1872), s. 2(a)
3 The Indian Contract Act,1872 (act 9 of 1872), s. 2(b)
 2.TYPES OF OFFER IN THE CONTRACT LAW
2.1 EXPRESS OFFER
2.2 IMPLIED OFFER
2.3 CROSS OFFER
2.4 STANDING OFFER
2.5 GENERAL OFFER
2.6 SPECIFIC OFFER

2.1 EXPRESS OFFER

Section 9 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 says that:-
“ In so far as the proposal or acceptance of any promise is made in words, the promise is
said to be express. In so far as such proposal or acceptance is made otherwise than in words,
the promise is said to be implied.”
An offer is said to be an express offer when it is made by words of mouth or expressed in
writing.

2.2 IMPLIED OFFER

As explained in Section 9 above, an offer made otherwise than in words, would be called an
implied offer. It is an offer which is understood by the conduct of the parties. For example
bidding at an auction would be classified as under this category. In such cases, the conduct of
the parties may take the place of written and spoken words in the offer and the intention of
parties is derived from the conduct and circumstances of the case.4

2.3 CROSS OFFER :-

When the offers containing similar terms of bargain cross each other in post, they are known as
cross offers. For example on 1st January, A offered to sell his watch to B for a sum of
Rs. 2000 /- through a letter sent by post. B simultaneously made an offer to A to buy his watch
for a sum of Rs. 2000 /- . In this case no contract was executed between the parties and hence
no legal obligation on either of them to execute their part. A contract could arise only if either
A or B, after having the knowledge of the offer accepted the same.5

4 Haji Mohd. Ishaq v. Mohd. Iqbal, 1978 AIR 798 SCR (3) 571
5 Tinn v. Hoffmann (1873) 29 LT 271
 2.3 STANDING OFFER :-
5 Tinn v. Hoffmann, (1873) 29 LT 271
An offer which is allowed to remain open for acceptance over a period of time is known as
standing, open or continuing offer. For example an offer to supply 1,000 bags of wheat
from 1st January to 31st December, in accordance with the orders which may be placed
from time to time is a standing offer. As and when the order are placed that amounts to
acceptance of the offer to that extent.6 Acceptance of a tender for the supply of goods is a
kind of standing offer. An “advertisement tender” is merely an invitation for quotations.
When the tender is approved, it becomes a standing offer. It wholly depends on the offeror
for the period he would like to keep the contract open for sale.

2.4 GENERAL OFFER

One of the main topic of our study – General Offer. When the offer is made to the general
public at large, then it will be considered as a general offer. For instance, an offer to give
reward to anybody who finds a lost dog will be considered as a general offer. This general
offer will be deemed to be accepted by anyone who actually finds the lost dog. But this
situation also finds itself in crosshairs with the famous case of Lalman Shukla v. Gauri
Dutt7 which will be discussed in detail in the succeeding para. The person, who accepts
this offer, generally by performing the condition of the proposal, can bind the person
making the offer. Although a general offer is made to the public at large, the contract is
binding only with that person who acts upon the terms of the offer, viz., who accepts the
offer.

It is settled that two manifestations of a willingness to make the same bargain do not
constitute a contract unless one is made with reference to the other.8

In Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt, the defendant’s nephew absconded from home. The
plaintiff, who was defendant’s servant, was sent to search for the missing boy. After the
plain tiff had left in search of the boy, the defendant issued handbills announcing a reward
of Rs. 501 /- to anyone who might find out the boy. The plaintiff, who was ignorant of this
reward, was successful in finding the boy. When he came to know of the reward, which
had been announced in his absence, he brought an action against the defendant to claim
this reward. It was held that since the plaintiff was ignorant of the offer of the reward, his
act of bringing the lost boy did not amount to the acceptance of the offer, and, therefore,
he was not entitled to claim the reward.
If a person has the knowledge of the offer, his acting in accordance with the terms thereof
amounts to the acceptance of the same. In such a case, it is immaterial that at the time of
accepting the offer, the acceptor does not intent to claim the reward mentioned in the
offer.
_______________________

6 Bengal Coal Co. v. Homee Wadia Co., ILR(1899) Bom 97

7 Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt, (1913) 40 ALJ 489
8 Anson's Law of Contract 36 (2002)
In another famous case of Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.,9 the defendants advertised
their product “Carbolic Smoke Ball”, a preventive remedy against influenza. In the
advertisement they offered to pay a sum of a sum of 100 pounds as reward to anyone who
contacted influenza, cold or any disease caused even after having used the Smoke Ball
three times a day for two weeks, in accordance with the printed directions. They also
announced that a sum of 1000 pounds had been deposited with the Alliance Bank to show
their sincerity in the matter. The plaintiff (Mrs. Carlill) relying on the advertisement
purchased a Smoke Ball from a chemist, used the same in accordance with the directions of
the defendants, but still got infected with the influenza.

She sued the defendants to claim a reward of 100 pounds advertised by them. It was
contended by the defendants that there was no intention to enter into legal relations as it
was simply a puffing advertisement; that the offer was not made to any one person
particular and that the plaintiff had not communicated her intention to accept. The first
argument was easily disposed of by BOWEN LJ by saying: “Was it intended that the 100
pounds should, if the conditions were fulfilled, be paid? The advertisement says that 1000
pounds is lodged at the bank for the purpose. Therefore, it cannot be said that the statement
that 100 pounds would be paid was intended to be a mere puff.”

It was held that this being a general offer addressed to all the world had ripened into a
contract with the plaintiff by her act of performance of the required conditions and thus
accepting the offer. The following observations by Bowen L.J., may be noted :

“It is an offer made to the entire world, and why should not an offer be
made to all the world which is to ripen into a contract with anybody who comes
forward and performs the condition? It is an offer to become liable to anyone who,
before it is retracted, performs the condition, and, although the offer is made to the
world, the contract is made with that limited portion of the public who came
forward and performed the condition on the faith of the advertisement.”

It has been noted above that performance of the conditions of the offer amounts to the
acceptance of the offer. It may be further noted here that unless the person performing
those conditions has got the knowledge of the offer, there is no question of his act
amounting to acceptance.

________________________

9 Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., (1893) 1 QB 256 (CA)

PROPOSALS ACCEPTABLE BY CONDUCT

His Lordship also pointed out that in cases like this communication of acceptance is not
necessary.
“As notification of acceptance is required for the benefit of the person who makes
the offer, he may dispense with notice to himself if he thinks it desirable to do so
…. and if he expressly or impliedly intimates in his offer that it will be sufficient to
act on the proposal without communicating acceptance of it to himself,
performance of the condition is a sufficient acceptance without notification. In the
advertisement cases it seems to follow as an interference to be drawn from the
transaction itself that a person is not to notify his acceptance of the offer before he
performs the condition…..I advertise to the world that my dog is lost and that
anybody who brings the dog to a particular place will be paid some money, are all
the police and other people whose business is to find lost dogs to sit down and
write me a note saying that they have accepted my proposal?” 10

Performance of the conditions of a proposal, or the acceptance of any consideration for a

reciprocal promise which may be offered with a proposal, will be regarded as the
acceptance of the proposal.

The principle of General Offer was followed by Years CJ of the Allahabad High Court in
Har Bhajan Lal v. Har Charan Lal11 and applied to a situation where the terms of a
general offer were substantially, though not literally complied with. The facts of the case
are nearly similar to that of Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt12 but with minor differences.

A young boy ran away from his father's home. The father subsequently issued a pamphlet,
offering a reward in these terms: "Anybody who finds trace of the boy and brings him
home, will get Rs 500." The plaintiff was at the Dharamshala of a railway station, there he
saw the boy, overheard part of his conversation with others, realized that the boy was the
one who is to be found and promptly took him to the Railway Police Station and sent a
telegram to the boy's father that he had found his son.

It was held that the handbill was an offer open to the whole world and capable of
acceptance by any person who fulfilled the condition, and that the plaintiff substantially
performed the condition and was entitled to the amount offered.

It has been observed in a decision of the Patna High Court13 that "where the acceptance is
to consist of an act, as for example, dispatching goods ordered by post, the rule is that no
further communication of acceptance is necessary.”

_______________________
10 Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co., (1893) 1 QB 256 (CA)
11 Har Bhajan v. Har Charan Lal, AIR 1925 All 539
12 Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Dutt, (1913) 40 ALJ 489
13 State of Bihar v. Bengal Chemical, AIR 1954 Part 14
GENERAL OFFER OF CONTINUING NATURE

Where a general offer is of continuing nature, as it was, for example, in the Smoke Ball
case, it will be open for acceptance to any number of persons until it is retracted. But where
an offer requires some information as to a missing thing, it is closed as soon as the first
information comes in.

Now we shall study about Catalogue and display of goods. But before that it is imperative
for us to gain knowledge about the concept of Offer and Invitation to Treat.

OFFER AND INVITATION TO TREAT

An offer should be differentiated from an invitation to receive offers of goods. When a man
advertises that he has got a stock of copies to sell, or houses to let people in, there is no
offer to be bound by any contract. “Such advertisements are offers to negotiate – offers to
receive offers – offer to chaffer.” An offer is the final expression of willingness by the
offeror to be bound by his offer, should the other party choose to accept it.

This may be inferred from the definition of “proposal” in Section 2(a)14, which emphasises
that there should be the expression of willingness to do or abstain with a view to obtaining
the assent of the other. The offeror must have expressed his willingness to contract in
terms of his offer with such decisiveness that the only thing to be waited for is the
acceptance on behalf of the other party. This is basically the basic distinction between
“offer” and “invitation” to receive offers. The privy council in Harvey v. Facey15 has
explained the difference more precisely :-

The plaintiffs telegraphed to the defendants, writing: “Will you sell us the Bumper
Hall Pen? Telegraph lowest cash price.” The defendants replied, also by a telegram:
“Lowest price for bumper Hall pen, 900 pounds.”

The plaintiff immediately sent their last telegram stating: “We agree to buy Bumper
Hall Pen for 900 pounds asked by you.”

The defendant, however, refused to sell the plot of land at that price. The plaintiffs
contended that by quoting their minimum price in response to the enquiry the defendants
had made an offer to sell at that price. But the Judicial Committee did not accept the
argument.

______________________
14 The Indian Contract Act, 1872 (Act 01), s. 2(a)
15 Harvey v Facey (1893) A.C
 Their Lordships pointed out that in their first telegram, the plaintiffs had asked two
questions, first, as to the willingness to sell and, second, as to the lowest price. The
defendants answered only the second, and gave only the lowest price. They reserved their
answer as to the willingness to sell. Thus, they had made no offer. The last telegram of the
plaintiffs was an offer to buy which was never accepted by the defendants.

CATALOGUE AND DISPLAY OF GOODS

A shopkeeper’s catalogue of prices is not an offer, it is not only an invitation to the

intending customers to offer to buy at the indicated prices. “The transmission of a price
list,” observed Lord Herschell, “does not amount to an offer to supply an unlimited
quantity of wine described at the price named, so that as soon as an order is given there is
a binding contract to supply that quantity. If it were so, the merchant might find himself
involved in any number of contractual obligations to supply wine of a particular
description which he would be quite unable to carry out, his stock of that description being
necessarily limited.”16

For the same reason the display of goods in a shop with price shits attached to it is not an
offer even if there is a "self-service" system in a particular shop. This was so held in
Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemists Southern Ltd.17

Lord Goddard CJ said: "It would be wrong to say that the shopkeeper is making an
offer to sell every article in the shop to any person who might come in and that
person can insist on buying any article by saying that ‘I accept your offer'.... In most
bookshops customers are invited to go in and pick up books and look at them even if
they do not actually buy them. There is no contract by the shopkeeper to sell until the
customer has taken the book to the shopkeeper or his assistant and said: ‘I want to
buy this book' and the shopkeeper says 'Yes'. That would not prevent the shopkeeper,
seeing the book picked up, saying, 'I am sorry I cannot let you have that book; it is
the only copy I have got and I have already promised it to another customer.'
Therefore, I am of opinion, the mere fact that a customer picks up a bottle of
medicine from the shelves in this case does not amount to acceptance of an offer to
sell. It is an offer by the customer to buy, and there is no sale effected until the
buyer's offer to buy is accepted by the acceptance of the price.”

___________________________

16 Grainger v. Gough, (1896) AC 325, 334 (HL).

17 Pharmaceuticval Society of Great Britain v. Boot Cash Chemists (Southern) Ltd., EWCA Civ 6.
 A banker's catalogue of charges is also not an offer. A railway timetable is in the same
category. Where a shopkeeper was convicted of offering for sale a flick-knife contrary to
the Restriction of Offensive Weapons Act, 1959 [S. 1(1)] (UK)18 which he had displayed in
his shop window, it was held that it was in no sense an offer for sale the acceptance of
which could constitute a contract.19 You cannot put for sale things which are barred by
law. This is the position in Indian law as well which can be seen in the WMD 2022 act and
other such legislations.

Announcement to hold auctions is also a kind of general offer which we will discuss
further now.

ANNOUNCEMENT TO HOLD AUCTION

An auctioneer's announcement that certain goods will be sold by auction on a particular

day is not an offer to hold the auction and he will not be liable to persons travelling up to
the place if he changes his mind and does not conduct the auction.20 Indication of reserve
price is neither a offer to sell at that price nor it is a valuation of the property. Even when
an auction is held, the bid is not an acceptance so as to entitle the highest bidder to receive
the goods. The highest bid is nothing more than an offer to buy and it requires to be
accepted by the auctioneer.20 This situation is aptly described in the case of Spencer v.
Harding.21 It does not matter for this purpose that the auction was held by the Government.
Even a Government auction may be cancelled before any bid is finally accepted.

The Government can even transfer the right of the auctioned material to a Government
Corporation before the due acceptance of bid and it is considered to be no argument by the
law that a corporation cannot afford to pay an amount equal to private bidders. The
Supreme Court has also given the leeway of ignoring the highest bid to the Government as
well, as is enjoyed by a private auctioneer, and may accept a lower bid. The highest bidder
may be found to be an undesirable person for many reasons, for example, from the mere
enormity of the bid. However, one contractor should not be preferred over another without
any rhyme or reason, this would be more so in the matter of Government contracts.22 In the
case State of U.P. and Anr. v. Vijay Bahadur Singh and Ors., the Govt. allotted the felling
of trees(Forest lost) right to the Forest Corporation, it had previously constituted and had
cancelled the auctioning process arbitrarily even when the bidding process was fetching a
price more than that of Forest Corporation. But the Government’s decision was given
preference in the Supreme Court judgment, it was contended that the arguments by the
plaintiff for the preservation of forests and some events might have led the plaintiff to
believe that the rights of forest would be better served in the hands of the corporation.
Therefore the rights of the forests were awarded to the Forest corporation only. -
________________________

18 The Offensive Weapons Act, U.K. (Act 01 of 2019)

19 Fisher v. Bell, (1961) 1 QB 394(DC)
20 Harris v. Nickerson, (1873) LR 8 QB 286
21 Spencer v. Harding, (1870) 5 CP 561
22 State of U.P. v. Vijay Bahadur Singh, (1982) 2 SCC 365
 Where out of the participating bidders or tenderers, any one is called to revise his figure, an
equal opportunity should be given to the highest bidder or the lowest tenderer, provided
there is otherwise no ill - will against him. Fixation of reserve price in an invitation for
submission of tenders has been held to be not an offer.

DEFINITENESS OF PROPOSAL

A classified advertisement to the effect: "shoes and socks 25s. each" has been held to be
not an offer to sell. Similarly, a letter which stated that the writer was prepared to offer for
sale his estate for a certain price and allow reasonably sufficient time for verification of
data and detail for the completion of the sale, was held to be not a definite offer.

Now we will discuss and talk about Specific Offer.

2.5 SPECIFIC OFFER

The concept of Specific Offer is less complex and more straightforward than the General
Offers. A specific offer refers to an offer made to a specific individual or group of
individuals. It can only be accepted by the individual or group of individuals to whom it is
directed.

CONCLUSION

This brings us to the end of our insightful discussion about different types of offers with a
special focus on General and Specific Offer and the subdivisions of General offer. When an
offer is accepted, it becomes binding and the doctrine of Promissory Estoppel bars the
contracting parties from revocating or going back on their promises but with a few
exceptions though these are out of our purview for our current discussions. We also saw
the English context and the similarities between Indian and English laws are almost same.
These are basics of Contract Law and it is necessary to comprehend and analyze them
properly as an attempt is made here.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 R.K. BANGIA LAW OF CONTRACT

 AVTAR SINGH LAW OF CONTRACT

 ANSON’ LAW OF CONTRACT, 2002