Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: consensus ad idem in The New India Assurance Company Limited vs M/S. Dewa Properties Ltd on 13 February, 2015Matching Fragments
Judgment Reserved on : 30.01.2015 Judgment Pronounced on : 13.02.2015 When a contract get concluded or when a concluded contract come into existence?
1.1. Whether a contract can be spelt out of performance established through long correspondence?
1.2. Whether there had been consensus ad idem on the subject matter of the contract between the parties?
1.3. When the conduct demonstrates the contract, whether non-completion of the final part of the agreement alone can be pleaded towards denial of the existence of the contract itself?
4.6. There was no consensus ad idem between the parties. The cause of action has arisen in the year 1981. In the absence of concluded contract to even execute a lease deed, the suit claim is not maintainable. On these grounds, the defendant seeks dismissal of the suit.
5. Based on pleadings, the following issues were framed for trial:-
1.whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief of specific performance by compulsory registration of lease agreement (Ex.P-2), for 99 years?
2.Whether the plaintiff has paid the entire lease premium?
14.11. The notification of acceptance to the person who makes the offer is considered essential only to ensure that the two minds may come together. The two minds, when remain apart, there is no expected consensus which is necessary to constitute a contract. But when the evidence indicates that there is consensus ad idem and the major part of the contract having been performed on both sides, the first act of getting the document executed has been destined to be the last act, then the contention that there is no consensus ad idem and there is no concluded contract have no meaning and it deserves to be rejected.
15.3. This clause contemplating repair work / reconstruction work after 50 years would only go to show the period of lease agreed as noted in the agreement must be 99 years and the defendant is willfully denying the period of lease with ulterior motive.
No Consensus ad idem
16. The specific case of the defendant is that the plaintiff and the defendant could not arrive at a consensus on the terms and conditions of the lease and therefore, there was no grant or transfer of the premises to the plaintiff in any manner known to law, much less for a period of 99 years.