Indian Contract Act — Section 5
Revocation of proposals and acceptances.—A proposal may be revoked at any time before the
5. Revocation of proposals and acceptances.—A proposal may be revoked at any time before the
communication of its acceptance is complete as against the proposer, but not afterwards.
An acceptance may be revoked at any time before the communication of the acceptance is complete
as against the acceptor, but not afterwards.
A proposes, by a letter sent by post, to sell his house to B.
B accepts the proposal by a letter sent by post.
Illustration
A may revoke his proposal at any time before or at the moment when B posts his letter of acceptance, but not afterwards.
B may revoke his acceptance at any time before or at the moment when the letter communicating it reaches A, but not
afterwards.
Uttar Pradesh
STATE AMENDMENT
Amendment of section 5 of Act (9 of 1872).—In section 5 of Indian contract Act, 1872, hereinafter in this Chapter referred to as the principal Act, at the end of the first paragraph, the following explanation shall inserted, namely:--
“Explanation—Where an invitation to a proposal contains a condition that any proposal made in response to such invitation shall be kept open for a specified time and a proposal is thereupon made accepting such condition, such proposal may not be revoked within such time.”
[Vide Uttar Pradesh Act, 57 of 1976, s. 2]
Follow cited cases · Browse courts and years · Research topics
Judgments citing Section 5
- HIMALAYA COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD. v. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED
- HIMALAYA COMMUNICATIONS PVT. LTD. v. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED
- Western Coalfields Ltd. v. M/s Khandelwal Earth Movers & Ors.
- Aparna Philip v. Dr. Jayalakshmi Shreedhar
- NO. 14633 OF RESERVED ON : SE DATE OF DECISIO SEPTEMBER 06 v. Union Bank of nager nk of India through Chief Manager
- High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh · 2024
- M/s Swastik Traders, a partnership firm v. The State of Bihar
- Sri Utpal Kumar Choudhury v. The State of Assam
- M/S Gaikhonlung Panmei v. The Food Corporation of India & Ors.
- SMTI. KEWEPE KAPFO AND 3 ORS v. THE SPEAKER, NLA AND 2 ORS
- M.M. VARGHESE v. KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
- R K CONSTRUCTION COMPANY v. STATE OF GUJARAT
- SC) (Yogesh Mehta v. Custodian appointed under the Special Court), wherein & Ors.
- SHRI KISHAN GOPAL VERMA (SINCE DEAD) REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS v. THE BALOISE MARINE INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND OTHERS
- M/s United Oil Mill Machinery and Spare (P) Ltd, Ballabgarh v. State of Haryana
- VHCPL-ADCC PINGALAI INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. AND ANR. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
- S. Muthukrishnan v. The Commissioner HR & CE Department Nungambakkam High Road Chennai – 600 034
- Sudhakar S. Pangol v. State of Maharashtra
- M/s. Alcon Builders & Engineers v. To be referred to Reporter or not?
- IN TIN T v. Chief Officer, Mira-Bhayander Municipal
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.