Course Code: BSL 605 Course Title: Legal Aspects of Business

Course Instructor: Dr. SACHIN

Academic Task No.: CA 2 Academic Task Title: Assignment

Date of Allotment: 06-08-2020 Date of submission: 04-09-2020

Student’s Roll no: A03 Student’s Reg. no: 11917586

Evaluation Parameters:

Declaration:

We declare that this Assignment is my individual work. We have not copied it from any
other student’s work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is
made explicitly in the text, nor has any part been written for me by any other person.

Student’s Signature:

Evaluator’scomments (For Instructor’s use only)

General Observations Suggestions for Improvement Best part of assignment

Marks Obtained: Max. Marks:

Evaluator’s Signature and Date:

1
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

In the present world of competition there is a race of existence in which those

who are having will to come forward will succeed. The project offered us is

like a bridge between theoretical and practical working, with this will we joined

this particular project. I am feeling obliged in taking the opportunity to

sincerely thank our Teacher Dr. Sachin who guided and enlightened us with

the practical aspect of Business Laws. We would especially like to thank our

faculties for providing us this wonderful opportunity where we can learn and

experience the Business laws.

Last but not least I am thankful to all my batch members who helped me in

successful completion of this project; it has all been possible by their

contribution and continuous efforts.

2
 TABLE OF CONTENT

SL CHAPTER PAGE

1 Case on Consumer Protection Act 4-6

2 Case on Sales of goods act 7-9

3 Case on Breach of contract and 10-13

Remedies for the breach of contract

3
 CASE ANALYSIS ON CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT

INTRODUCTION OF THE TOPIC:

SPRING MEADOWS HOSPITAL VS HARJOL AHLUWALIA

The Factual Background of the case

This landmark case emerges out of a complaint against Spring Meadows Hospital, where the
minor youngster – Harjol Ahluwalia was admitted to the hospital by his folks. The youngster
was diagnosed with typhoid and was infused with an injection by a medical caretaker after
which his condition became worse. He was moved to an auto respiratory ICU at AIIMS,
where it was discovered that because of the infusion given, his cerebrum got harmed and he
would just live in a vegetative state forever. The guardians of the youngster tended to the
court for an instance of clinical carelessness and requested pay, for the benefit of the kid. The
two guardians and Minor can guarantee for pay under the Consumer Protection Act. This
complaint was documented under the watchful eye of the Supreme Court by an emergency
clinic safeguarding the carelessness of its medical attendants and a specialist which brought
about a minor being in a lasting vegetative state substituent to a mind discharge

PARTIES OF THE CASE

DEFENDANT: Spring Meadows Hospital

PLAINTIFF: Harjol Ahluwalia

4
ISSUE AND FACTS

Conflicts by nurse and the hospital:

• There was no clinical carelessness as the medical attendant was expertly qualified.

• The arrangement of the infusion applied was at that point being given in the oral structure,
consequently the medical attendant didn't do any test for infusion.

• The medical caretaker didn't practice autonomous choice, was just going about according to
bearings of the paediatrician.

• The medical clinic likewise contends that pay can't be asserted twice, by both the kid and his
folks.

• The clinic likewise looked for asylum in the way that after the kid was pronounced
vegetative by AIIMS, they elected to offer clinical administrations without charge to the guardians.

RULE OF LAW

• The new act permits buyers to get an expanded sum as pay from wayward respondents, while
the discipline for the last cases has additionally been made more severe. The remuneration
sum is higher to the point that the Plaintiff even can get up to Rs 1 lakh alongside concerned
wards/guardians, on the off chance that they are deceived or enjoying unlawful practices. The
respondent may likewise be condemned to as long as a half year of prison. Notwithstanding,
this remuneration is just for the situation where the offended party has not been harmed.

• In case they are straightforwardly or by implication hurt, the offended party can even get up
to Rs 5 lakh as remuneration, and the prison term for the litigant could stretch out as long as
seven years. In the event that the offended party bites the dust, the pay could run up to Rs 10
lakh with subsequent remuneration to wards and the litigant could be condemned to a day to
day existence detainment term. If there should be an occurrence of a resulting offense, the
fine may reach out to Rs 50 lakh and detainment of as long as five years.

5
ANALYSIS:

• Definition of consumer sufficiently wide to cover the beneficiary: When a small kid is
taken to a medical clinic by his/her folks and the youngster is treated by the specialist, the
guardians would come quite close to the customer having recruited the services, and the small
kid would likewise turn into a "customer" under the inclusive definition.

• Compensation can reasonably be claimed by the two guardians and the kid: The court
expresses that the youngster is supported in looking for pay for the common clinical costs,
gear, and so on, for the vegetative state he is delivered in. The guardians are likewise, as
recipients qualified for look for compensation for the torment, intense mental misery and
deep rooted care that they'd be needed to provide for the youngster. Subsequently, the court
maintained the remuneration of Rs.17.5 lakhs granted by the National Commission, which
was likewise the most elevated sum at any point granted

CONCLUSION:

• The court while putting forth a defence for net carelessness suppressed these contentions and
considered the emergency clinic dependable, for the clinical school of the attendant had no
association, the infusion overdose had prompted the youngster's mind harm and there was no
occupant specialist present.

• It by a wide margin the equity gave to the recipients just as the casualty has he gas been
deadened for the entire life for the carelessness of the clinic staffs.

• Reducing indicative botches will require clinics, specialists, attendants, and others to zero in
on decreasing framework mistakes. That can be generally basic sometimes: specialists can
create agendas to help perceive the alerts of high-hazard torment patients and okay patients.

• Another method of lessening framework mistake is for clinics to zero in on forestalling lab
comes about because of being lost and data not being shared among specialists and
authorities.

• Robert Hanscom, a VP with clinical misbehaviour safety net provider Crisco/RMF, says
demonstrative mistakes give off an impression of being developing. Essential consideration
doctors are regularly under strain with high caseloads, again and again taking easy routes, not
listening cautiously to their patients, and overlooking patient side effects.

6
 CASE ANALYSIS ON SALES OF GOODS ACT

INTRODUCTION OF THE TOPIC:

BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED VS MS JCL

INTERNATIONAL ENTERPRISE LIMITED

The Factual Background of the case

Ms. JCL international enterprise gives the solution for the supply and distribution of LPG as
residential, Industrial, and Automotive fuel. They complete LPG packaging for the shell, Bharat
Petroleum, and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation. Bharat Petroleum Corporation restricted (BPCL)
is one of the biggest public sector oil making organization in India. The dispute is tied in with
thinking about the Provisional price as the Final price.

PARTIES OF THE CASE:

DEFENDANT: Bharat Petroleum Corporation limited (BPCL)

PLAINTIFF: Ms. JCL international enterprise Limited

7
ISSUE AND FACTS

• JCL went into an agreement with BPCL for the supply of LPG chambers at Rs679.67.

• BPCL gave amendment to the purchase request which was agreed by the two players fixing
the cost of the chamber at Rs702.98. Chambers conveyed to BPCL and agreement closes.

• Both the players went into a new agreement for the supply of chamber at Rs702.98

• BPCL conveyed the reconsidered cost of chambers provided during the years from Rs702.98
to the provisional cost of Rs645

• BPCL alleged to have unlawfully self-assertively held/deducted about Rs 28.69 lakh from the
sum payable

• Petitioner request to designate a referee under 'Arbitrator Clause'

• The solicitor challenges the choice. Request permitted and new authority delegated

• The authority was selected and directs the discretion and because of its exchange another
judge is designated.

RULE OF LAW:

• Section 9 of the 1930 Act permits the players not to fix the cost at the hour of the exchange
and to leave the assurance of the measure of thought to a later date.

• Refixing and overhauling of cost were finished with due notification and in Breach of term
and state of the agreement or legal arrangement.

• Thus, considering the arrangement of Sales of Goods Act and the Contract Act, the fixation
of provisional cost can't be expressed to be impermissible and make no rights for offended
party.

• A agreement of offer of merchandise is an agreement whereby the vender moves or consents

to move the property in products to the purchaser at a cost. There might be an agreement of
offer between one section proprietor and another.

8
 • A agreement of offer might be total or restrictive. Where under an agreement of offer the
property in the products is moved from the dealer to the purchaser, the agreement is known as
a deal, yet where the exchange of the property in the merchandise is to happen at a future
time or subject to some condition from there on to be satisfied, the agreement is called a
consent to sell.

• An consent to sell turns into a deal when the time slips by or the conditions are satisfied
dependent upon which the property in the products is to be moved.

ANALYSIS:

• The price in an agreement of sales might be fixed by the agreement or possibly left to be
fixed in a way along these lines concurred or might be controlled by the course of managing
between the players.

• Where the cost isn't resolved as per the prior arrangement the purchaser will address the
vender a sensible cost . The sensible cost here is an issue of certainty subject to the conditions
of every specific case and with the case examined above is a perfect representation of it.

• A agreement of offer is made by a proposal to purchase or sell products at a cost and the
acknowledgment of such offer. The agreement may accommodate the quick conveyance of
the products or prompt installment of the cost or both, or for the conveyance or installment by
portions, or that the conveyance or installment or both will be delayed.

• Subject to the arrangements of any law for the present in power, an agreement of offer might
be made recorded as a hard copy or by overhearing people's conversations, or mostly
recorded as a hard copy and halfway by overhearing people's conversations or might be
inferred from the direct of the players.

9
CONCLUSION:

• In above case The cost isn't resolved as per the previous arrangements, the purchaser will

follow through on the merchant a sensible cost. What is a sensible cost is an issue of truth

reliant on the conditions of every specific case.

• Nothing in this Act or in any annulment affected accordingly will influence or be considered

to influence any right, title, intrigue, commitment or obligation previously obtained, collected

or acquired before the initiation of this Act.

• The rules of indebtedness identifying with contracts for the offer of merchandise will keep on

applying there to, not withstanding anything contained in this Act.

• The arrangements of this Act identifying with agreements of offer don't make a difference to

any exchange as an agreement of offer which is planned to work by method of home loan,

vow, charge or other security.

10