Q2. What is quantum meruit?

Explain
the cases in which the claim of
quantum meruit arises.
Ans. QUANTUM MERUIT:Quantum meruit literally
means as much as earned or as
much as merited. It implies a
payment for the work done. A
claim for quantum meruit may
arise when a person has done
some work under the contract, and
the other party repudiates the
contract or the work cannot be
performed
further
due
to
impossibility or illegality. The party
who has performed the contract
can claim reasonable remuneration
for the work done.
ESSENTIALS OF A CLAIM ON THE
BASIS OF QUANTUM MERUIT:

1 The party doing the work must have

been prevented to perform the
contract either by the other party or
by impossibility or illegality and not
on his violation. For example- A
engaged B to write a book to be
published by instalments in a weekly
magazine. The magazine had to be
abandoned after a few issues. Held,
B could ask for remuneration for the
work done on the basis of quantum
meruit.[PLANCHE V. COLBURN(1831)
8 Bing. 14]

2 The contract must be divisible; if the

contract is not divisible the claim on

the basis of quantum meruit will not

arise.
For example- A agreed to construct
four houses for B. After completing
two houses, B asks A to stop
construction. B must pay for the work
already done, i.e. for the two houses.

THE CASES IN WHICH A CLAIM ON

THE BASIS OF QUANTUM MERUIT
ARISES:-

1 Where an agreement is discovered

to be void or becomes void- The
party who has taken any benefit
under the contract must restore it
or repay it (Sec. 65).
For example- A agreed to purchase
Bs cow and paid an advance of Rs.
100 to B. Later on, it was
discovered that the cow was dead
at the time of contract. B must
return the sum of Rs. 100 to A.
2 Where the contract is completely
performed rather badly- In this
case payment can be claimed after
allowing for deduction for work
done badly.

For example- A agreed to decorate

Bs flat for a lump sum of Rs. 1000.
A did not work, but B complained of
faulty workmanship. B got the
defect removed by paying Rs. 500.
Held, A could recover Rs. 1000 less
Rs. 500. [HOEING V. ISAACS (1952)
All. E.R. 176]
3 When
something
is
done
or
delivered without an intention to
do so gratuitously (Sec. 70)- Where
a person lawfully does anything for
another
person,
or
delivers
anything to him not intending to do
so gratuitously and such other
person enjoys the benefit thereof,
the latter, is bound to make
compensation to the former in
respect thereof.
For example- A, a trader, leaves
goods at Bs house by mistake. B
treats the goods as his own. B is
bound to pay A for them.

4 Where one party to the contract is

prevented from performing the
contract by the other party or by
impossibility or illegality.
For example- Printing of a book had
to be abandoned as it contained
libellous matter. The plaintiff was
held entitled to recover on the
basis of quantum meruit. [CLAY V.
YATES (1856) 25 L.J. Ex. 237]

Q3. What are the remedies

available to a seller in case of
breach of contract of sale?
Ans. REMEDIES FOR THE BREACH
OF
CONTRACT OF SALE ARE:-

1. Sellers suits1. Suit for price.

2. Suit for damages for non
acceptance of the goods.
3. Suit for damages for repudiation
of
contract by the buyer before
the due date.
4. Suit for interest.

2. Buyers suits-

1. Suit for damages for nondelivery of the goods.

2. Suit for specific performance.
3. Suit for breach of warranty.
4. Suit for interest.
5.
Suit
for
damages
for
repudiation of
contract
by the
seller before the due date.

Q4. Analyze the following cases

and answer the questions with the
help of statutory provisions and
decided cases.

CASE NO. 1:A representative from Eureka Forbes

visits Andrew on the 1st February
2009. He informs Andrew that his
company is prepared to install Aqua
guard at a guaranteed price of Rs
5000. Andrew is hesitant and decides
to think the matter over. The
representative leaves, pointing out
that the guaranteed price only
remain open till 8thFebruary, 2009.

On the following day, Andrew sees an

advertisement by Eureka Forbes,
which offers Aqua guard at a
standard price of Rs 4500. He
immediately
telephones
Eureka
Forbes in order to accept the terms of
this advertisement. The company
replies that owing to high demand,
the
advertised
offer
has
been
withdrawn.
On 7th February 2009, Andrew
telephones Eureka Forbes again. He
leaves a message with the answering
service in which, he accepts the offer
of Rs. 5000 made by the company
representative. He also sends a letter
confirming the order that afternoon.
Andrew later goes to the pub for a
drink where he meets a friend who
informs him that he can obtain Aqua
guard from another firm for Rs 4000.
Andrew rushes home and telephones
Eureka Forbes expressing his wish to
cancel the order. The secretary, now

on duty, points out that she has not

yet had an opportunity of listening to
the answering service tapes but that
she will note down his wishes.
Andrews letter of the 7th Feb 2009
arrives on the 9th Feb 2009 at Eureka
Forbes
Premises.
The
letter
is
received by the secretary of Eureka
Forbes. Whether there is a valid
contract between Andrew and Eureka
Forbes.
ANSWERNo, it is not a valid contract. There
is
no
proper
offer
and
its
acceptance. The acceptance should
be
made
to
the
sales
representative. There is neither
proper communication of the offer
nor its acceptance.

CASE NO.2:In Re McArdle 1951, a number of

children were
entitled to a house on
the death of their mother. Whilst the
mother was still alive, her son and
daughter-in-law lived with her and the
daughter-in-law made improvements to
the property. The children later
promised that they would pay the
daughter-in-law for this work, but after
her mother-in-laws death, the children
refused to pay. Was the daughter-in-law
able to claim this payment?
ANSWER-

No, the daughter-in-law cant claim

this payment. In the above case the
consideration is not made by the
promisor. The consideration must move
from the desire of the promisor. The
improvement in the property made by
the daughter-in-law is not done at the
permission of the sons. The sons may or
may not make the payment to the
daughter-in-law.
[ABDUL
AZIZ
VS.
MASUM ALI, (1914)]

CASE NO.3:A purchase a television from B on Bs

plea that though it is old, it is an
excellent condition. A finds later on that
the television set does not work at all.
Can he reject the set and recover his
money.

ANSWERYes, A can reject the television set and

can also recover the money. The sale is
based on implied condition of the quality
of product, according to the SALES OF
GOODS ACT, 1930. A acts on the
representation of B, there is a fraud
made by B. It is a case of fraud as there
is a false representation of the excellent
condition of the T.V. The false
representation of the condition was
made by B to induce A to buy the
television set. He can rescind the
contract.