COL. D.I. MAC PHERSON versus M. N. APPANNA AND ANOTHER

Citation: [1951] 1 S.C.R. 161 · Decided: 09-02-1951 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BIJAN KUMAR MUKHERJEA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
COL. D.I. MAc PHER:SON 
ti. 
M. N. APPANNA AND ANOTHER. 
fSAIYID FAZL ALI, MuKHERJEA and 
CHA.NDRASEKHAllA AIYAR JJ.] 
161 
Contract-OOer and acceptanc~tatement of lowest price and 
counter-offer disting1111hell. 
On receiving an offer from A for the purchase of a house be-
longing to B, Y w!Jo was looking after . the house c.abled to B 
that there was an offer of Rs. 6,000 for the house. B sent a cable 
in reply on the 5th August, 1944, that he would not accept less 
than Rs. 10,000. 
Y conveyed this informatio_n to A on the 9th 
and on the 14th A wrote a letter to Y stating that he thereby 
confirmed the oral offer of Rs. 10,000 that he had made to Y 
on the 11th. On the :6:h Y cabled to B as follows : "Offered 
Rs. 10,000. May I sell". On the same day, W, another frienJ 
of B, with whom also B was in correspondence, sent an offer for 
Rs. 
11,000 and B accepted it. 
A sued for specific performance 
alleging that B's cable of the 5th was a counter-offer 
anJ as he 
had accepted it on the 14th, there was a concluded contract for 
sale in his favour on that day. 
Held, that the table sent 1>y B on the 5th was a men: state-
ment of the lowest price at . which he would sell and contained no 
implied contract to sell at that price. A's letter of the 14th was 
under the circumstances only a fresh offer; and as B had not 
accepted it ~ere was no concluded contract in favour of A. 
Haruey v. Faeey l1893 J A.C. 552 applied. 
CML 
APPELLATE 
JURiso1CT10N. 
Appeal 
from a 
judgment and decree of the Judicial Commissioner of 
Coorg, dated 1st April, 1946, in Original Suit No. 1 
of 1945. 
C.R. Pattabhi Raman, for the appellant.. 
Jindra Lal, for the respondent. 
195L February 9. 
The judgment of the Court 
was delivered by 
!95! 
Feb.9 
FAZL ALI J.--This is an appeal from a judgment 
Fad ~Ii]~ 
of the Judicial Commissioner of Coorg in a suit filed 
bv the first respondent (hereinafter referred to as the 
plaintiff) against the appellant (hereinafter referred to 
as . the first defendant) 
and the second respondent 
195! 
Col. D.I. 
Mae Pherso• 
v. 
M. N. APP.••• 
and amJther. 
Fa<l Ali]. 
162 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1951) 
(hereinafter referred to as the second defendant), for 
the specific performance of a contract. 
The first 
defendant owned a bungalow in Mercara known as 
"Morvern Lodge". 
The suit which has given rise to 
this appeal was instituted by the plaintiff for the 
specific performance of an alleged contract of sale in 
respect of this bungalow. 
It appears that the first defendant owned certain 
estates in Mercara, and one Mr. White was an alter-
native director in one of the estates, and Youngman 
was the manager of another estate also belonging to the 
first 
defendant 
and 
was 
looking 
after 
"Morvern 
Lodge" during his absence. 
It seems that 
about the 
middle of 1944, the plaintiff asked White if he would 
cable to the first defendant his offer of Rs. 4,000 for the 
bungalow, and, on the 1st June, 1944, White sent 
a 
cable to the first defendant to the following effect :-
"Have enquiries 
Mercara 
bungalow if for sale, 
wire lowest figure." 
On the 24th July, 1944, the plaintiff wrote to the 
first defendant that he was prepared to purchase the 
bungalow for Rs. 5,000 and if the offer was acceptable 
to him, he (the first defendant) should inform the 
plaintiff to which bank he should issue a cheque in 
payment of the price. This letter was followed up by 
a cable from Youngman to the first defendant to 
the 
following effect :-
"Have 
had 
offer 
Morvern Lodge 
rupees 
~ix 
thousand for immediate possession." 
On the 8th August, 1944, Youngman received a 
cable from the first defendant saying : "Won't accept 
Jes~ than rupees ten thousand". On the 7th August, 
1944, the plaintiff wrote to Youngman asking him 
whether his offer had been accepted, and saying that 
he was prepared to accept any higher price if found 
reasonable. Meanwhile, on the 8th August, the first 
defendant sent 
an 
airgraph 
to 
Youngman, 
which 
states inter alia :-
"I got a cable from you a few days 
ago saying 
you had had an offer of Rs. 6,000 for Morvern Lodge. 
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
163 
At the same time I got one from White saying value 
of Bungalow was Rs. 10,000. 
So wired you-'W on't 
accept less 
than Rs. 
10,000'." On the 9th August, 
1944, Youngman, wrote to the plaintiff as follows :-
"In reply to your letter, dated 7th August, I 
received yesterday a cable from 
Col. 
MacPhers

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.