Question

Arjun, at the request of the local community leader, builds a playground for the children in his neighborhood, spending a considerable amount of his own money. Later, Ravi, a local snack vendor, sets up a stall near the playground to sell snacks to children and promises to give Arjun 10% of his profits from all sales as a token of appreciation for building the playground. However, Ravi fails to pay Arjun the promised percentage, and Arjun decides to take legal action to recover it.
Based on contract law principles, which of the following is correct?

• A. Arjun is entitled to the percentage of profits as Ravi benefited from his efforts in building the playground.
• B. Arjun cannot claim the percentage of profits, as the playground was built at the request of the community leader and not Ravi.
• C. Ravi must pay Arjun the promised percentage since he made a verbal commitment to do so.
• D. Ravi has to pay Arjun only if Arjun can prove the playground was built specifically for his benefit.

Hint:

A valid contract requires a promise made in return for an act done at the promisor's request—not for past voluntary acts.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

For a contract to be legally binding under Indian Contract Law and common law, a valid consideration and a clear mutual agreement must exist at the time of the action.
In this specific scenario:

• Arjun constructed the playground as a gratuitous act at the community leader's request, not Ravi's.
• Ravi's offer to share profits was made subsequent to the playground's completion.
• As the act of building the playground was not performed at Ravi's behest, and no antecedent agreement existed between Arjun and Ravi, a legally enforceable contract is absent.

Subsequent promises made in appreciation of past voluntary actions are not legally enforceable under contract law. Consequently, Arjun cannot compel Ravi to fulfill his later promise.