LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More



Hello Everyone... i am having one query related to standard forms of contract.

basically i want to ask whether the terms printed on the back of the form filled by the customer during activation of new pre-paid mobile SIM are binding on the customer or not ? as it is a standard form of contract and moreover the terms and conditions are not given back to the customer. whether these terms and conditions are binding ? also the condition restricting jurisdiction is binding or not ?


plz reply


 7 Replies

Rakesh Shekhawat (Advocate)     25 April 2010


Terms printed on the back of the form can not be said that parties have accepted it as a condition. It does not amount to a conscious decision taken by parties. That's why terms printed on the back of the form are not binding on the customer. Clause in the agreement restricting jurisdiction to one court applies only when two or more courts have jurisdiction to entertain a suit and the parties, otherwise condition which are restricting jurisdiction are against law and not binding.

AEJAZ AHMED (Legal Consultant/Lawyer)     25 April 2010

Dear Mohit,


When you connect to any Mobile service, the Terms and Conditions will apply to you and binding.


Because the customer will sign on the Application form below the following paragraph by accepting the terms and conditions:




" I/We hereby declare that information given above is true to the best of my knowledge and I will abide by the prevailing Telegraphic Act/Rules framed thereunder & tariffs as amended from time to time, I/We am not a defaulter on account of non – payment of bills for any telecom  services provided by any service provider. I have read and understood the terms and conditions overleaf to form for prepaid cellular services and accept them as binding one me. "


Vodaphone :


I/We have read and fully understood the terms and conditions mentioned overleaf and unconditionally accept them as binding on me/us. I/We have understood all the rates, tariffs and other related conditions at which telecommunications services will be provided inside and outside India as applicable as on this date and as amended from time to time. I/We hereby undertake to pay all charges raised on account of Services subscribed. I/We undertake that in the event this connection is used for any telemarketing purpose, I/we shall be solely responsible for registration of the connection with the mandated statutory authorities. I/We further declare and undertake that above information provided by me/us is true and correct in all respect.




Yes jurisdiction Term shall also apply and binding on the customer as it is one of the clause of Terms and Condition printed on overleaf of the Application forms.




The validity, construction and performance of this prepaid application form shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with laws of the Republic of India. The Courts of shall have exclusive jurisdiction in respect of the subject matter of this Prepaid application form.


Attached File : 23 23 enrollment form mah 1.pdf downloaded: 107 times


thnxx @ above all

sir, in standard forms of contract 1st party is in the dominating position and 2nd party has no option bt to accept the terms. bt in order to make those terms binding there must be reasonable opportunity given to the 2nd party to understand the terms.

firstly:- in case of mobile pre-paid forms the form is not given back to the customer.. customer has to just sign the form. can this plea can be taken that there is no reasonable opportunity to understand the terms , also no rules / conditions have been given to them. ?

secondly:- limiting jurisdiction to one particular area where the regional office is situated is against the public policy and hence void according to Indian Contract Act... ?  For example : a person is living in a particular place say "X" n mobile company has limit the jurisdiction of court at place "Y" n the difference between place "X" n place "Y" is 50kms, even when service is provided at place "X". now the customer has to go 50kms to file a case whereas Consumer Protection Act provides that a complaint can be filed where cause of action arises. Now can a company can form such conditions which are goinst against the provisions of law and also are against the public policy ?

plz reply

Rakesh Shekhawat (Advocate)     25 April 2010

Dear Mohit 

As far as signature  is concern if you sign in the end of all terms certainly  you can't escape from it's result. but if you have not signed in the end of terms it  will be not binding. But as far as jurisdiction is concern Parties by agreement cannot confer jurisdiction in a Court which does not have jurisdiction.  Such an agreement is hit by Ss.23 & 28 of the Contract Act.


hello sir, matter is like dat:

a person is residing at place "X" purchases pre-paid connection from the same place"X" and given the id proff of the same place "X".

bt the last condition of the form is:- courts of place " Y " will have the only jurisdiction to entertain any dispute.

now in such condition according to the act courts at "X" have the jurisdiction. can the company take the plea to file the complaint at place "Y" ? n whether it is admissible ?

Rakesh Shekhawat (Advocate)     25 April 2010

Agreement restricting jurisdiction to one Court where two or more Courts have jurisdiction to entertain the suit. Such an agreement is not hit by S.28 of the Contract Act, nor such a contract can be said to be against public policy. It is legal, valid and enforceable. So it all depends on nature of ur complaint.

V. VASUDEVAN (LEGAL COUNSEL)     25 April 2010

While I concur with Adv.Ahmed's view point on binding terms while signing the initial application, several companies of telecom and even credit companies, subsequent to acceptance of the pre-pair/credit card, etc., keeps in varying the terms and conditions by simply printing them on the statements. Also such terms and conditions are no way in accordance with the Telegraph Act (for mobile) or the RBI regulations and even the common law principles for credit cards. For instance a credit company, for delay of 4 days of the due, has levied, interest at exorbitant rates. Further-more it deemed the entire balance for the whole month (which other-wise

eligible for credit) as a retail transaction and charged transaction fee. The whole amount is close to 10% of the principal amount, just for a few days delay!, WOULD SOLICIT YOUR VIEWS ON THIS.



Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register