Owner of a valuable ring, which was stolen from her house, advertised that she would pay Rs. 150/- to any person giving her information which would lead to recovery of the ring, and the arrest of the thief. The thief, in fact, was a lodger in A’s house and A gave the owner the required information......A now claims the reward. Is he entitled to it?

Question: Owner of a valuable ring, which was stolen from her house, advertised that she would pay Rs. 150/- to any person giving her information which would lead to recovery of the ring, and the arrest of the thief. The thief, in fact, was a lodger in A’s house and A gave the owner the required information. A’s reason for giving the information was that he was afraid of being accused of receiving the stolen property. A now claims the reward. Is he entitled to it?

Find the answer to the mains question of the Law of Contract only on Legal Bites. [Owner of a valuable ring, which was stolen from her house, advertised that she would pay Rs. 150/- to any person giving her information which would lead to recovery of the ring, and the arrest of the thief. The thief, in fact, was a lodger in A’s house and A gave the owner the required information. A’s reason for giving the information was that he was afraid of being accused of receiving the stolen property. A now claims the reward. Is he entitled to it?]

Answer

This question pertains to an offer which is known as a general offer made to the public at large. A is claiming reward of Rs. 150 from the owner of the valuable stolen ring on the ground that he helped in the recovery of the ring by providing information about the same.

The owner of the ring advertised that she would pay Rs. 150 to any person giving her information which would lead to the recovery of the ring and the arrest of the thief. Such a type of offer is an offer to the public at large. In such alike cases, to show acceptance of an offer one has to perform the condition of the offer so as to bind the promisor. The moment one acts upon the terms of the offer, he can be said to have accepted such an offer. In this respect, reference may be made to Section 8 of the Contract Act which provides that performance of the conditions of a proposal, or the acceptance of any consideration for a reciprocal promise which may be offered with a proposal, is an acceptance of the proposal.

In this case, the claimant actually a lodger in A’s house committed theft of the ring. Although he provided the owner with the required information about the ring, there is nothing in the facts to suggest that the claimant provided full information that he had committed theft of the ring or accordingly surrendered it before the owner. Facts also do not reveal that the claimant knew of the offer made by the owner. It is necessary that the parties must intend to create a legal relationship. In this case, the reason for giving the information to A was that he was afraid of being accused of receiving the stolen property. It cannot be said that by providing information about the ring, the claimant intended to accept the offer put forth by the owner, so as to term the same as the promise. Therefore, the claim for reward is liable to be dismissed.