Section 6: Revocation how made

Indian Contract Act • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1872
Statutory Defined Terms in this Section: (Click any term for official legal definition)

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 6

Section 6 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 prescribes four exhaustive statutory modes through which a proposal is revoked prior to acceptance, delineating the operational boundaries of unilateral offer termination by notice, lapse of time, breach of condition precedent, or proposer incapacity.

  • Revocation by Communication of Notice (Sec 6(1)): A proposal is effectively revoked when notice of revocation is communicated by the proposer to the other party; under Sections 4 and 5, revocation must reach the offeree before he transmits acceptance to complete revocation against him.
  • Revocation by Lapse of Prescribed or Reasonable Time (Sec 6(2)): A proposal lapses automatically upon the expiration of the time stipulated for acceptance, or if no timeframe is prescribed, upon the lapse of a reasonable time without communication of acceptance; what constitutes reasonable time is a question of fact depending on commercial conditions.
  • Revocation by Failure of Condition Precedent & Mental Status/Death (Sec 6(3)-(4)): A proposal is revoked if the offeree fails to fulfill a condition precedent to acceptance; or upon the death or insanity of the proposer, provided strictly that the fact of death or insanity comes to the knowledge of the acceptor before acceptance is communicated.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. Girdharilal & Co. (1966) 1 SCR 656 / AIR 1966 SC 543: A 5-Judge Constitution Bench ruled that while postal acceptances bind the proposer upon dispatch, contracts entered into via instantaneous communications (telephone, telex) are completed only when acceptance is received by the offeror; an offer can be revoked at any time before such instantaneous receipt.
  • State of West Bengal v. Mahendra Chandra Roy AIR 1986 Cal 198: Held that a tenderer is legally entitled to revoke his tender before acceptance, even if the tender document stipulated a fixed validity period, unless independent valuable consideration was furnished to keep the offer open.
  • Ramsgate Victoria Hotel Co. v. Montefiore (1866) LR 1 Ex 109: Affirmed that an application for shares could not be accepted after an unreasonable delay of five months; the offer lapsed automatically under the doctrine of reasonable time codified in Section 6(2).
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

When advising bidders seeking to withdraw tenders or quotes, transmit formal revocation through instantaneous, verifiable electronic means (registered corporate email, digitally signed communication) prior to the dispatch of the acceptance or Letter of Intent. If the tendering authority attempts to forfeit earnest money deposit (EMD), plead Section 6 to establish that the offer was extinguished, defeating contractual penalties unless statutory bidding rules independently authorize pre-acceptance forfeiture.