TEAM CODE: 33A
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF INDIGO
Appeal No. _______ / 2023
IN THE MATTER OF
Plum Group (Appellants)
Vs
Manila Suki (Respondent)
An appeal under Section – 96 The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF APPEALANTS
FILED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE APPEALANTS
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.....................................................................................................3
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES......................................................................................................4
STATEMENT OF FACTS..........................................................................................................5
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION...........................................................................................7
ISSUES RAISED.......................................................................................................................8
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS................................................................................................9
2
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AIR …………………………………………………………………………... All India Report
SCC …………………………………………………………………….. Supreme Court Cases
Hon’ble …………………………………………………………………………….. Honorable
SC …………………………………………………………………………...… Supreme Court
PG ………………………………………………………………………………... Plum Group
P&H ……………………………………………………………………..… Punjab & Haryana
EBC ………………………………….………………………………. Eastern Book Company
V. ……………………………………………………………………………………..… Versus
3
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Indian Cases
Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur & Co., 1954 SCR 310
Sushila Devi v. Hari Singh, (1971) 2 SCC 288
Parmeshwar Das Mehra & Sons v. Firm Ram Chand Om Parkash, AIR 1952 P&H 34
Maritime National Fish, Ltd. v. Ocean Trawlers, Ltd., 1935 SCC OnLine PC 18
___________________________________________________________________________
Foreign Cases
Hadley v. Baxendale, (1854) 9 Ex. 341
Dharni v. Dhami, 1988 CLY 409
________________________________________________________________________________
Books
Rajesh Kapoor (2022) Avtar Singh's Contract & Specific Relief. Thirteenth Edition. EBC.
________________________________________________________________________
Journals
Ms. Archana K, Implications of Covid-19 Pandemic on the Contractual Obligations in India,
Volume3, Issue 1 CMR University Journal for Contemporary Legal Affairs 191-192 (2021).
________________________________________________________________________
Statutes
The Indian Contract Act, 1872
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
4
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Manila Suki is a world-famous Bharatnatyam performer affiliated with Indiphile, with
a massive fan base all around the world.
2. Plum Group (PG), a significant player in the entertainment business and film industry,
was tasked with organizing the opening ceremony of 'Nrityanga Sabha,' the largest
classical dance festival in the world, to be hosted in the capital city of Indiphile,
Indigo on the evening of January 21, 2023.
3. Manila Suki secured a $1 million contract with PG, of which 50% was paid in
advance, to perform at the opening ceremony of Nrityanga Sabha. PG was responsible
for the management of the artist's hospitality and other event management-related
duties. The contract featured stipulations restricting the artist's actions for the duration
of the agreement.
4. The restrictive actions included not to engage in sports activities, consume alcohol or
any drugs except on prescription, and not to eat at restaurants, bars, pubs, or food
stalls other than those provided by PG during the term of the contract.
5. Manila Suki was upset by the contract's stringent stipulations, but she signed it in
order to perform at such a famous event.
6. Two months prior to the catastrophe, published articles described the rapid spread of
the 'Cubo' virus in Indigo. PG indicated that all safeguards were being taken and that,
in the event of an emergency, the artists would receive the best medical care available.
7. Four days before her appearance at the event, Manila Suki arrived in Indigo, was
greeted by the PG management, and was placed in a four-star hotel.
8. On the second day of her vacation, while taking a brief walk outside the hotel, Manila
Suki consumed a local delicacy that made her ill. She reported shaking and slight
bodily discomfort, both of which are established 'Cubo' symptoms.
9. She phoned PG management, who dispatched a physician within thirty minutes. The
physician ordered antibiotics and recommended rest. On the third day, however, her
condition had not improved, and she was experiencing numerous adverse effects.
10. Given her deteriorating health, Manila Suki opted quickly to return home for better
medical care, without informing the administration of PG.
11. The management of PG assumed that Manila Suki was doing well and was occupied
with preparations for the event that was scheduled to take place in 18 hours. When
they discovered that Manila Suki had departed and had no intention of returning for
her performance, they warned her handlers with repercussions if she did not appear at
the inauguration celebration.
5
12. Since the event's expensive tickets had sold out in record time due to Manila Suki, the
PG administration panicked and made unprecedented arrangements in terms of extra
seats, advertising, and security. The Governor of Indigo attended the event as well.
The management of PG frequently contacted Manila Suki and her representatives,
threatening legal action against her for breach of contract.
13. The situation was reported to the public, and fans of Manila Suki began swarming the
office of PG management, demanding refunds if the performance did not go place.
14. Four hours prior to the inauguration, Manila Suki went live on her Sinistergram
profile to address her admirers over the issue. She faulted PG for not providing her
with sufficient and timely care and stated that PG's administration had some
significant questions to answer regarding their management and service quality
15. Manila Suki's live went viral, and her fans immediately launched a social media
campaign against PG, using hashtags like ‘CronyPG,’ ‘PatheticPG,’ and PG, which
caused a lot of harm to the goodwill of the company.
16. PG sued Manila Suki for breach of contract and damages in tune of 6 million dollars,
besides a refund of the advance amount paid with interest, for breach of the contract,
for loss of goodwill, and humiliation among peers, clientele, and the community at
large, but the case was ruled in favor of Manila Suki. PG is now appealing the ruling
to the High Court of Indigo.
6
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
Arising out of order dated ___/___/2023 passed by Hon’ble District Court of Indigo
Aggrieved by the judgement of District Court of Indigo, the appellants have approached this
Hon’ble Court under Section 96 of The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The instant case
pertains to breach of contract & defamation, and hence, an appeal under section 96 lies in
front of this Hon’ble Court.
7
ISSUES RAISED
THE APPEALANTS VERY RESPECTFULLY PUTS FORTH TO THIS HON’BLE COURT
THE FOLLOWING ISSUES
1. WHETHER THE CONTRACT BETWEEN MANILA SUKI AND PG IS VALID.
2. WHETHER THERE IS A BREACH OF CONTRACT ON PART OF MANILA SUKI
3. WHETHER THE WORDS SPOKEN BY MANILA ON SINISTERGRAM
AMOUNT TO DEFAMATION AS AGAINST PG.
4. WHETHER SECTION 56 OF THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT 1879, RENDER
THE CONTRACT VOID.
8
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
1. WHETHER THE CONTRACT BETWEEN MANILA SUKI AND PG IS VALID.
Section 10 of Indian Contract Act, 1872, states that all agreements are contracts if they are
made by the free consent of the parties competent to contract, with a lawful consideration and
with lawful object, and are not hereby expressly declared to be void. Although there was
certain ambiguity on behalf of Manila Suki, it could be established that the consent given by
her was free and was not subject to Coercion, Fraud, Misrepresentation or Undue Influence.
The parties to the contract were competent and they agreed upon the same thing in the same
sense. Lawful consideration i.e., money amounting to 1 million Dollars for a lawful object
I.e., her performing at the inaugural ceremony of Nrityanga Sabha could be realized. She
further went on to take 50 percent of the consideration that is promised. According to Section
18 of The Indian Contract Act 1872, if the party to a contract has received any advance from
other party, the contract must be performed by both the parties according to the terms agreed
upon. Advance payment creates an obligation on both the parties to perform their respective
obligations under the contract. The contract signed by the parties qualifies all the essentials to
a valid contract and can be enforceable by law.
