The defendant 'X', a sole proprietary concern manufacturing a medicine, which was a Barbolic Calis, whose smoke could be inhaled through the nose to cure influenza, cold and other connected ailments, issued an advertisem

As per section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is meant. As regards acceptance of the proposal, the same would be viewed from two angles. These are (i) from the viewpoint of proposer and, (ii) the other from the view point acceptor himself. From the viewpoint of proposer, when the acceptance is put in to a course of transmission, when it would be out of the power of acceptor. From the viewpoint of acceptor, it would be complete when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer. The three important principles relating to communication of an offer and acceptance are as under: An offer, to be capable of acceptance, must contain a definite promise by the offer or that he would be bound provided the terms specified by him are accepted; An offer may be made either to a particular person or to the public at large, and If an offer is made in the form of a promise in return for an act, the performance of that act, even without any communication thereof, is to be treated as an acceptance of the offer. The position was clearly explained in the famous case of "Carlill Vs Carbolic & Smokeball Co". Alternate Answer Section 4 of the Contract Act, 1872 deals with the completion of a proposal, acceptance and revocation and states: The communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made. The communication of an acceptance is complete, - as against the proposer, when it is put in a course of transmission to 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 of transmission to the person to whom it is made, so as to be out of the power of the person who makes it; as against the person to whom it is made, when it comes to his knowledge.