I.P. Mukerji, J. - (1.) Often only after a very complex process a contract is made between the parties. It is quite common that a contract is preceded by hectic negotiations. Offers are made. Sometimes they are withdrawn no sooner than made. Even after receipt of the offer, the other party may not readily accept it. He may change its terms and present it as a counter offer to the offerer for acceptance. Unless there is an unconditional acceptance of an offer and unless the parties are absolutely ad idem as to the bargain they have struck amongst themselves, there is no contract. A party cannot be held to it.
(2.) At this point of time it is helpful to have a look at certain provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872: S.2. - Interpretation-clause - In this Act the following words and expressions are used in the following senses, unless a contrary intention appears from the context: a) When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal. c) The person making the proposal is called the "promisor" and the person accepting the proposal is called the "promise". h) An agreement enforceable by law is a contract. S.4. - Communication when complete. - The communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person whom it is made. The communication of an acceptance is complete, - as against the proposer, when it is put in a course of transmission him so as to be out of the power of the acceptor; as against the acceptor, when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer. The communication of a revocation is complete, - as against the person who makes it, when it is put into a course transmission to the person to whom it is made, so as to be out of power of the person who makes it; as against the person to whom it is made, when it comes to his knowledge.
(3.) A point which is involved in this case is whether there was a concluded contract between the parties. The appellant (railways) says that there was a concluded contract whereas the respondents say that there was none.;