Indian Contract Act — Section 39
Effect of refusal of party to perform promise wholly.—When a party to a contract has refused
39. Effect of refusal of party to perform promise wholly.—When a party to a contract has refused to perform, or disabled himself from performing, his promise in its entirety, the promisee may put an end to the contract, unless he has signified, by words or conduct, his acquiescence in its continuance.
Illustrations
(a) A, a singer, enters into a contract with B, the manager of a theatre, to sing at his theatre two nights in every week during the next two months, and B engages to pay her 100 rupees for each night’s performance. On the sixth night A wilfully absents herself from the theatre. B is at liberty to put an end to the contract.
(b) A, a singer, enters into a contract with B, the manager of a theatre, to sing at his theatre two night’s in every week during the next two months, and B engages to pay her at the rate of 100 rupees for each night. On the sixth night, A wilfully absents herself. With the assent of B, A sings on the seventh night. B has signified his acquiescence in the continuance of the contract, and cannot now put an end to it, but is entitled to compensation for the damage sustained by him through A’s failure to sing on the sixth night.
By whom contracts must be performed
Follow cited cases · Browse courts and years · Research topics
Judgments citing Section 39
- UMADEVI AGARWALLA & ORS. v. NIRMAL KANODIA & ORS.
- UMADEVI AGARWALLA & ORS. v. NIRMAL KANODIA & ORS.
- The date when v. M/s Sri Balaji Metals And Minerals Pvt. Ltd. Through Raghav Lakhotia, Director
- TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANTS INDIA LTD v. M/S FRANS GLOBAL INFOTECH LTD.
- TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANTS INDIA LTD v. M/S FRANS GLOBAL INFOTECH LTD
- UNION BANK OF INDIA v. DELHI JAL BOARD & Ors
- (An application under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India) v. State of Odisha
- MANI’S DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT v. RISHINOX BUILDWELL LLP AND ORS
- MANI’S DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT v. RISHINOX BUILDWELL LLP AND ORS
- BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED (BHEL) v. XIAMEN LONGKING BULK MATERIAL SCIENCE & ENGG. CO. LTD.
- Kashinath Bhattacharjee, Contractor, Bhattacharjee v. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, a Govt. of India undertaking
- NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KARNATAKA v. U B SHETTY & Ors.
- Judgment · High Court · 2024
- M/S NEW AGE PETCOKE PVT LTD. v. THE NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD. AND 2 ORS
- M/S NEW AGE PETCOKE PVT LTD. v. THE NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD. AND 2 ORS
- M/S NEW AGE PETCOKE PVT LTD. v. THE NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD. & Ors.
- M/S NEW AGE PETCOKE PVT LTD. v. THE NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD. AND 2 ORS
- M/S NEW AGE PETCOKE PVT LTD. v. THE NUMALIGARH REFINERY LTD. & Ors.
- COURT OF SIKKIM : GANGTOK (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) DATED : 20th December v. The Chief Engineer
- Disposing of the matters, the Court v. An individual can manipulate the system by having more than
Text reproduced from the public statutes on which the corpus is built. Verify against the official Gazette before relying on it. This is statute reference, not legal advice.