Contract Law in India: Essential Elements & Indian Contract Act 1872

{/* Internal link suggestions: /practice-areas/corporate-law, /book-appointment, /blog/register-private-limited-company-india, /blog/startup-legal-compliance-india */}

Introduction

The law of contracts forms the very foundation of commercial and civil life. Every transaction -- from purchasing groceries to executing multi-crore business deals -- involves contractual relationships, whether express or implied. The ability to enter into binding agreements, rely on promises, and enforce obligations through the legal system is what makes modern commerce and economic activity possible.

In India, the law governing contracts is primarily contained in the **Indian Contract Act, 1872**, one of the oldest pieces of commercial legislation still in force. Enacted during British rule, the Act has proven remarkably durable and continues to govern contractual relationships across the country, supplemented by the **Specific Relief Act, 1963** (which provides remedies for breach), the **Indian Partnership Act, 1932**, the **Sale of Goods Act, 1930**, and other special statutes.

The Indian Contract Act, 1872 is divided into two parts:

- **General Principles of Contract** (Sections 1-75): Covering the formation, performance, and breach of contracts.

- **Special Contracts** (Sections 124-238): Covering specific types of contracts including indemnity and guarantee, bailment and pledge, and agency.

This article provides a comprehensive educational overview of contract law in India -- the essential elements of a valid contract, types of contracts, the doctrines governing consent and capacity, remedies for breach, and key judicial pronouncements.

---

Essential Elements of a Valid Contract (Section 10)

**Section 10** of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 states:

> "All agreements are contracts if they are made by the free consent of parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and are not hereby expressly declared to be void."

From this foundational provision, the essential elements of a valid contract can be identified:

1. **Offer (Proposal) and Acceptance**

2. **Consideration**

3. **Free Consent**

4. **Capacity of Parties**

5. **Lawful Object**

6. **Not Expressly Declared Void**

Each of these elements must be present for a contract to be valid and enforceable. The absence of any one element renders the agreement either void (having no legal effect from the beginning) or voidable (capable of being set aside at the option of one party).

---

Offer and Acceptance (Sections 2-9)

Offer / Proposal (Section 2(a))

**Section 2(a)** defines a **"proposal"** (offer) as follows: 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.

Key characteristics of a valid offer:

- The offer must be **definite and certain** -- vague or ambiguous offers cannot form the basis of a contract.

- The offer may be **express** (made in words, written or spoken) or **implied** (inferred from conduct).

- The offer may be made to a **specific person**, a **class of persons**, or to the **world at large** (a general offer). The classic example of a general offer is **Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. [1893] 1 QB 256**, where the English Court of Appeal held that an advertisement promising a reward constituted a valid offer to the world at large.

- The offer must be **communicated** to the offeree. An offer that is not communicated cannot be accepted.

- An offer can be **revoked** at any time before acceptance, as provided under **Section 5**.

Acceptance (Sections 2(b) and 7)

**Section 2(b)** provides that when the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be **accepted**. A proposal, when accepted, becomes a **promise**.

Requirements for valid acceptance:

- Acceptance must be **absolute and unqualified** (**Section 7**). A conditional or qualified acceptance is not acceptance but a **counter-offer**.

- Acceptance must be **communicated** to the offeror.

- Acceptance must be made in the **prescribed manner** or, if no manner is prescribed, in some usual and reasonable manner (**Section 7(2)**).

- Acceptance must be made while the offer is still **subsisting** (i.e., before it is revoked or has lapsed).

- **Silence does not constitute acceptance**. The offeror cannot impose on the offeree an obligation to reject expressly in order to avoid being bound.

Communication of Offer and Acceptance (Sections 3-5)

**Section 3** provides that communication of proposals, acceptances, and revocations must be made by any act or omission by which the communicating party intends to communicate, or which has the effect of communicating.

**Section 4** specifies when communication is complete:

- Communication of an **offer** is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the offeree.

- Communication of an **acceptance** is complete -- as against the **proposer**, when it is put in the course of transmission so as to be out of the power of the acceptor (e.g., when the letter of acceptance is posted); as against the **acceptor**, when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer.

This "postal rule" (communication of acceptance being complete upon dispatch) is a distinctive feature of Indian contract law, derived from English common law principles.

---

Consideration (Section 2(d) and Sections 23-25)

Definition (Section 2(d))

**Section 2(d)** defines **consideration** as follows: When, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee or any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise.

Key features of consideration under Indian law:

- **Consideration must move at the desire of the promisor** -- Voluntary acts not requested by the promisor are not valid consideration.

- **Consideration may move from the promisee or any other person** -- This is a significant departure from English law, where consideration must move from the promisee. In India, a stranger to the consideration (but not a stranger to the contract) can enforce the contract. The Madras High Court in **Chinnaya v. Ramayya (1882) ILR 4 Mad 137** established this principle.

- **Consideration may be past, present, or future** -- Past consideration (an act done before the promise) is valid in India, unlike in English law.

- **Consideration need not be adequate** -- The law does not require that the consideration be of equal value to the promise. Inadequacy of consideration is not a ground for invalidating a contract, though it may be relevant in determining whether consent was freely given (**Explanation 2 to Section 25**).

Agreements Without Consideration (Section 25)

An agreement without consideration is generally **void** under **Section 25**. However, the Act recognises three exceptions where an agreement without consideration is enforceable:

1. **Natural love and affection** (Section 25(1)): An agreement made out of natural love and affection between parties standing in a near relation to each other, if expressed in writing and registered, is enforceable.

2. **Compensation for past voluntary services** (Section 25(2)): A promise to compensate a person who has already voluntarily done something for the promisor is enforceable.

3. **Promise to pay a time-barred debt** (Section 25(3)): A written promise signed by the debtor (or their authorised agent) to pay a debt barred by the law of limitation is enforceable.

---

Free Consent (Sections 13-22)

What Is Free Consent? (Section 14)

**Section 13** defines **consent** as when two or more persons agree upon the same thing in the same sense. **Section 14** defines **free consent** as consent that is not caused by:

1. **Coercion** (Section 15)

2. **Undue influence** (Section 16)

3. **Fraud** (Section 17)

4. **Misrepresentation** (Section 18)

5. **Mistake** (Section 20-22)

A contract where consent is not free is **voidable** at the option of the party whose consent was so caused (except in cases of certain types of mistake, where the agreement is void).

1. Coercion (Section 15)

**Section 15** defines coercion as committing, or threatening to commit, any act forbidden by the **Indian Penal Code** (now the **Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023**), or the unlawful detaining or threatening to detain any property, to the prejudice of any person whatever, with the intention of causing any person to enter into an agreement.

**Effect:** A contract induced by coercion is **voidable** at the option of the party coerced (**Section 19**).

In **Ranganayakamma v. Alwar Setti (ILR 1889 13 Mad 214)**, the Madras High Court held that a threat not to allow the cremation of a deceased husband's body unless the widow adopted a boy constituted coercion, rendering the adoption agreement voidable.

2. Undue Influence (Section 16)

**Section 16** provides that a contract is said to be induced by undue influence where the relations subsisting between the parties are such that one of the parties is in a position to **dominate the will** of the other and uses that position to obtain an **unfair advantage** over the other.

A person is deemed to be in a position to dominate the will of another where:

- They hold a **real or apparent authority** over the other (e.g., employer-employee, doctor-patient).

- They stand in a **fiduciary relationship** to the other (e.g., solicitor-client, guardian-ward, trustee-beneficiary).

- They make a contract with a person whose **mental capacity is temporarily or permanently affected** by reason of age, illness, or mental or bodily distress.

**Effect:** A contract induced by undue influence is **voidable** at the option of the party whose consent was so obtained (**Section 19A**).

3. Fraud (Section 17)

**Section 17** defines **fraud** as any act committed by a party to a contract (or with their connivance or by their agent) with intent to deceive another party or to induce them to enter into the contract. Fraud includes:

- A suggestion as a fact of that which is not true by one who does not believe it to be true.

- Active concealment of a fact by one having knowledge or belief of the fact.

- A promise made without any intention of performing it.

- Any other act fitted to deceive.

- Any such act or omission as the law specially declares to be fraudulent.

**Effect:** A contract induced by fraud is **voidable** at the option of the party defrauded (**Section 19**). Additionally, the defrauded party may insist that the contract be performed and that they be put in the position they would have been in had the representation been true.

4. Misrepresentation (Section 18)

**Section 18** defines **misrepresentation** as:

- A positive assertion made in a manner not warranted by the information of the person making it, though the person believes it to be true.

- Any breach of duty which gains an advantage to the person committing it (or anyone claiming under them) by misleading another to their prejudice.

- Causing, however innocently, a party to an agreement to make a mistake as to the substance of the thing which is the subject of the agreement.

The key difference between fraud and misrepresentation is the **element of intent**. In fraud, the misstatement is made with the **intention to deceive**; in misrepresentation, the party genuinely believes the statement to be true.

**Effect:** A contract induced by misrepresentation is **voidable** at the option of the misled party (**Section 19**).

5. Mistake (Sections 20-22)

Mistake can render a contract void or voidable, depending on the nature of the mistake:

- **Bilateral mistake of fact** (Section 20): Where both parties to an agreement are under a mistake as to a **matter of fact essential to the agreement**, the agreement is **void**. For example, if both parties contract for the sale of specific goods that have already perished without either party's knowledge, the agreement is void.

- **Unilateral mistake of fact** (Section 22): Where only one party is under a mistake as to a matter of fact, the contract is **not voidable** merely on that ground (unless the mistake was induced by the other party's fraud or misrepresentation).

- **Mistake of law** (Section 21): A contract is not voidable because it was caused by a mistake as to any law in force in India. **Every person is presumed to know the law.** However, a mistake as to a law not in force in India is treated as a mistake of fact.

---

Capacity to Contract (Sections 11-12)

Who Is Competent to Contract? (Section 11)

**Section 11** provides that every person is competent to contract who:

1. Is of the **age of majority** according to the law to which he is subject (18 years under the **Indian Majority Act, 1875**; 21 years if a guardian has been appointed by a court).

2. Is of **sound mind** (Section 12).

3. Is **not disqualified** from contracting by any law to which he is subject.

Minors and the Doctrine of Mohori Bibee

The most significant judicial pronouncement on the capacity of minors to contract is the Privy Council's decision in **Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose (1903) ILR 30 Cal 539**. In this landmark case, a minor had mortgaged his property to a moneylender. The Privy Council held that the mortgage was **void ab initio** (void from the beginning) and not merely voidable, because a minor is incompetent to contract under Section 11.

Key principles regarding minors' contracts:

- An agreement with a minor is **void ab initio** -- it cannot be ratified upon attaining majority.

- A minor can be a **beneficiary** of a contract but cannot be bound by its obligations. For instance, a minor can be a promisee or a payee.

- A minor cannot be adjudged **insolvent** because they cannot incur debts.

- A minor can, however, be supplied with **necessaries** suited to their condition in life, and the supplier can claim reimbursement from the minor's estate (not from the minor personally) under **Section 68**.

- The doctrine of **estoppel** does not apply to a minor -- a minor who misrepresents their age is not estopped from later pleading minority.

Persons of Unsound Mind (Section 12)

**Section 12** provides that a person is said to be of **sound mind** for the purpose of making a contract if, at the time of making it, he is capable of **understanding** it and of forming a **rational judgment** as to its effect upon his interests.

A person who is usually of unsound mind but **occasionally of sound mind** may make a contract when of sound mind. Conversely, a person who is usually of sound mind but **occasionally of unsound mind** may not make a contract when of unsound mind.

---

Void, Voidable, and Unenforceable Contracts

Void Agreement (Section 2(g))

A **void agreement** is one that is not enforceable by law. It has no legal effect from the beginning. Examples include agreements without consideration (subject to exceptions), agreements in restraint of trade (**Section 27**), agreements in restraint of marriage (**Section 26**), agreements by way of wager (**Section 30**), and agreements with a minor.

Void Contract (Section 2(j))

A **void contract** is a contract that was valid when entered into but has subsequently become void due to impossibility of performance, change in law, or other supervening events (**Section 56**).

Voidable Contract (Section 2(i))

A **voidable contract** is one that is enforceable at the option of one or more of the parties but not at the option of the other. Contracts induced by coercion, undue influence, fraud, or misrepresentation are voidable at the option of the party whose consent was not free.

Unenforceable Contract

An **unenforceable contract** is one that is valid in substance but cannot be enforced due to a technical defect, such as the absence of a required stamp or registration. It may become enforceable once the defect is cured.

---

Types of Contracts

Based on Formation

- **Express Contract**: A contract where the terms are stated in words (written or spoken).

- **Implied Contract**: A contract where the terms are inferred from the conduct of the parties or the circumstances of the case.

- **Quasi-Contract** (Sections 68-72): Not a contract in the strict sense, but obligations imposed by law to prevent unjust enrichment. Examples include the supply of necessaries to a person incapable of contracting (Section 68) and liability of a person to whom money is paid or thing delivered by mistake (Section 72).

Based on Performance

- **Executed Contract**: A contract in which both parties have fully performed their obligations.

- **Executory Contract**: A contract in which one or both parties have yet to perform their obligations.

- **Partly Executed**: One party has performed, the other has not.

Contingent Contracts (Sections 31-36)

**Section 31** defines a **contingent contract** as a contract to do or not to do something if some event, collateral to such contract, does or does not happen. For example, a contract of insurance is a contingent contract -- the insurer's obligation to pay arises only upon the occurrence of the insured event.

Key rules governing contingent contracts:

- **Section 32**: Contingent contracts dependent on the **happening** of an uncertain future event cannot be enforced until the event happens. If the event becomes impossible, the contract becomes void.

- **Section 33**: Contingent contracts dependent on the **non-happening** of an uncertain future event can be enforced when the happening of that event becomes impossible.

- **Section 34**: Contingent contracts dependent on the conduct of a **living person** are to be treated as uncertain events.

- **Section 36**: Contingent contracts dependent on **impossible events** are void.

---

Breach of Contract and Remedies

A **breach of contract** occurs when a party fails to perform their obligations under the contract, performs them defectively, or repudiates the contract before the time for performance. The Indian Contract Act and the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provide several remedies.

1. Damages (Sections 73-75, Indian Contract Act)

**Section 73** provides that when a contract is broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive **compensation** for any loss or damage caused to them thereby, which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach, or which the parties knew, when they made the contract, to be likely to result from the breach.

This section codifies the principle laid down in the English case of **Hadley v. Baxendale (1854)**, which distinguishes between:

- **General damages**: Losses that arise naturally in the ordinary course of things from the breach.

- **Special damages**: Losses that were in the contemplation of both parties at the time of contracting as the probable result of the breach.

**Section 73** also provides that compensation for breach is not to be given for any **remote or indirect** loss or damage.

**Section 74** provides for **liquidated damages and penalty**: When a contract has been broken, if a sum is named in the contract as the amount to be paid in case of breach, or if a penalty is stipulated, the party complaining of breach is entitled to receive reasonable compensation **not exceeding the amount so named or the penalty**, whether or not actual damage has been proved. In **Kailash Nath Associates v. Delhi Development Authority (2015) 4 SCC 136**, the Supreme Court held that Section 74 applies to both liquidated damages and penalties, and that the person claiming breach must prove **actual loss** unless the contract itself provides for a genuine pre-estimate of damages.

**Section 75** provides that a person who rightfully rescinds a contract is entitled to compensation for any damage sustained through the non-fulfilment of the contract.

2. Specific Performance (Specific Relief Act, 1963)

Under **Section 10 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963** (as amended in 2018), specific performance of a contract shall be enforced by the court, subject to the provisions contained in Sections 11(2), 14, and 16.

After the **2018 amendment**, specific performance is the **default remedy**, and the court is not to grant damages as a substitute unless specific performance involves hardship that is not reasonably foreseeable.

Specific performance is typically granted for contracts involving **immovable property**, as each piece of land is considered unique and monetary compensation may not be an adequate remedy.

3. Injunction (Specific Relief Act, 1963)

An **injunction** is a court order restraining a party from doing a particular act (prohibitory injunction) or compelling a party to perform a particular act (mandatory injunction). Injunctions are governed by **Sections 36-42 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963**.

**Section 42** provides that where a party to a contract has undertaken **not to do something** (a negative covenant) and breaches that undertaking, the court may grant an injunction to restrain the breach, even where specific performance of the affirmative terms of the contract cannot be granted.

4. Quantum Meruit

**Quantum meruit** (Latin for "as much as he has earned") is a remedy that entitles a party who has performed part of their obligations under a contract (before the contract was discharged or breached by the other party) to receive **reasonable compensation** for the work done. This remedy is based on the principle of unjust enrichment and is available under **Section 65** and **Section 70** of the Indian Contract Act.

---

Indemnity and Guarantee (Sections 124-147)

Contract of Indemnity (Sections 124-125)

**Section 124** defines a **contract of indemnity** as a contract by which one party promises to save the other from loss caused to them by the conduct of the promisor himself or by the conduct of any other person.

**Section 125** provides the rights of the indemnity holder: the indemnity holder is entitled to recover from the promisor all damages, costs of suits, and sums paid under compromise, provided the compromise is not contrary to the promisor's orders and is prudent.

Contract of Guarantee (Sections 126-147)

**Section 126** defines a **contract of guarantee** as a contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability, of a third person in case of their default. Three parties are involved:

- **Surety**: The person who gives the guarantee.

- **Principal debtor**: The person whose default is guaranteed against.

- **Creditor**: The person to whom the guarantee is given.

Key principles:

- A surety's liability is **co-extensive** with that of the principal debtor (**Section 128**), unless otherwise provided in the contract.

- A **continuing guarantee** (**Section 129**) extends to a series of transactions.

- A surety is **discharged** by variance in the terms of the contract without the surety's consent (**Section 133**), by release or discharge of the principal debtor (**Section 134**), and by creditor's act or omission impairing the surety's remedy (**Section 139**).

---

Bailment and Pledge (Sections 148-181)

Bailment (Sections 148-171)

**Section 148** defines **bailment** as the delivery of goods by one person (the **bailor**) to another person (the **bailee**) for some purpose, upon a contract that the goods shall, when the purpose is accomplished, be returned or otherwise disposed of according to the directions of the bailor.

Key provisions:

- The bailee is bound to take as much **care of the goods** bailed as a person of ordinary prudence would take of their own goods of the same bulk, quality, and value (**Section 151**).

- The bailee must **return the goods** without demand as soon as the time for which they were bailed has expired or the purpose is accomplished (**Section 160**).

- The bailee has a **lien** (right to retain possession) on the goods bailed for the charges due (**Section 170** for particular lien; **Section 171** for general lien for bankers, factors, wharfingers, attorneys, and policy brokers).

Pledge (Sections 172-181)

**Section 172** defines a **pledge** as the bailment of goods as security for payment of a debt or performance of a promise. The bailor in a pledge is called the **pawnor** and the bailee is called the **pawnee**.

The pawnee has the right to retain the goods pledged until payment of the debt, interest, and all necessary expenses (**Section 173**). If the pawnor defaults, the pawnee may file a suit for the amount due or sell the goods after giving reasonable notice (**Section 176**).

---

Agency (Sections 182-238)

**Section 182** defines an **agent** as a person employed to do any act for another or to represent another in dealings with third persons. The person for whom such act is done or who is so represented is called the **principal**.

Creation of Agency

An agency may be created by:

- **Express appointment** (written or oral).

- **Implied authority** (inferred from the circumstances).

- **Necessity** (where a person is compelled by circumstances to act for another).

- **Ratification** (Section 196: where a person acts on behalf of another without authority, and the other person subsequently adopts or confirms the act).

- **Estoppel / holding out** (where a person by their conduct leads others to believe that a certain person is their agent).

Duties and Rights of Agents

- The agent must conduct the business of the principal according to the principal's **directions** (**Section 211**).

- The agent must carry on the business with reasonable **skill and diligence** (**Section 212**).

- The agent must render proper **accounts** (**Section 213**).

- The agent has a right to **remuneration** (**Section 219**) and a right of **lien** on the principal's property (**Section 221**).

Principal's Liability

The principal is **bound by the acts of the agent** done within the scope of the agent's authority (**Section 226**). Acts done by an agent in excess of authority (but which are separable from authorised acts) bind the principal only to the extent of the authorised portion (**Section 227**).

---

Limitation Period for Contract Claims

Under the **Limitation Act, 1963**, the limitation period for various contract-related claims is as follows:

| Claim | Limitation Period | Article |

|---|---|---|

| Suit for compensation for breach of a written contract | **3 years** from the date of breach | Article 55 |

| Suit for compensation for breach of an oral contract | **3 years** from the date of breach | Article 55 |

| Suit for specific performance | **3 years** from the date fixed for performance or when the plaintiff has notice of refusal | Article 54 |

| Suit upon a promissory note or bill of exchange | **3 years** from the date the instrument falls due | Article 19 |

| Suit for money payable for goods sold and delivered | **3 years** from the date of delivery | Article 22 |

Filing a suit beyond the limitation period will result in the suit being dismissed as **time-barred**, regardless of the merits of the claim.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

What are the essential elements of a valid contract in India?

Under **Section 10** of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a valid contract requires: (1) an offer and acceptance, (2) lawful consideration, (3) free consent of the parties, (4) competent parties (capacity to contract), (5) a lawful object, and (6) the agreement must not be one that is expressly declared void by law.

Is a contract valid without consideration?

Generally, no. An agreement without consideration is **void** under **Section 25**. However, there are three exceptions: (a) agreements made out of natural love and affection between near relations, if in writing and registered; (b) a promise to compensate for past voluntary services; and (c) a written promise to pay a time-barred debt.

Can a minor enter into a contract in India?

No. Under **Section 11**, a minor (a person who has not attained the age of 18, or 21 if a guardian has been appointed by a court) is not competent to contract. As held by the Privy Council in **Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose (1903)**, an agreement with a minor is **void ab initio**. However, a minor can be a beneficiary of a contract and can be supplied with necessaries under Section 68.

What is the difference between void and voidable contracts?

A **void agreement** has no legal effect from the outset and cannot be enforced by either party. A **voidable contract** is valid and enforceable but can be **set aside at the option** of the party whose consent was not free (e.g., due to coercion, undue influence, fraud, or misrepresentation). Until the aggrieved party elects to avoid the contract, it remains binding.

What remedies are available for breach of contract?

The remedies include: (1) **Damages** under Sections 73-75 of the Indian Contract Act (compensation for loss or damage arising from the breach); (2) **Specific performance** under the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (court order to perform the contractual obligation); (3) **Injunction** (court order restraining breach of a negative covenant); and (4) **Quantum meruit** (reasonable compensation for work already performed).

What is the difference between fraud and misrepresentation?

**Fraud** (Section 17) involves a deliberate intention to deceive the other party. **Misrepresentation** (Section 18) involves an honest but incorrect statement -- the person making the statement genuinely believes it to be true. Both make the contract voidable, but fraud additionally entitles the aggrieved party to claim damages in tort.

What is a contingent contract?

A **contingent contract** (Section 31) is a contract to do or not to do something if some uncertain future event, collateral to the contract, occurs or does not occur. Insurance contracts are the most common example. The contract cannot be enforced until the contingent event occurs (or it becomes clear that it will not occur).

What is the limitation period for filing a suit for breach of contract?

Under the **Limitation Act, 1963**, the limitation period for a suit for compensation for breach of contract (whether written or oral) is **3 years** from the date of breach (Article 55). For specific performance, the limitation period is **3 years** from the date fixed for performance or when the plaintiff has notice of the defendant's refusal to perform (Article 54).

Can an oral contract be enforced in India?

Yes. Indian law recognises both written and oral contracts as valid and enforceable, subject to the essential elements being present. However, certain types of contracts are required by law to be in writing and/or registered -- for example, contracts for the sale of immovable property must be by registered instrument (**Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882**), and contracts that must comply with the **Indian Stamp Act, 1899**.

What is quantum meruit?

**Quantum meruit** means "as much as he has earned." It is a remedy available when a party has performed part of their contractual obligations before the contract was discharged by the other party's breach. The performing party is entitled to **reasonable compensation** for the work already done, based on the principle that no one should be unjustly enriched at another's expense.

---

*Disclaimer: This article is published for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice, a solicitation, or an advertisement. The information provided is based on Indian laws and judicial pronouncements as of the date of publication and may be subject to change. No reader should act or refrain from acting based on this article without seeking professional legal advice tailored to their specific facts and circumstances. For personalised guidance, please consult a qualified advocate.*