Application of Law: Moreover the message that was left by Vicky on the answering machine of Ajaz can only be considered as an acceptance of the offer is there is still a valid offer present which could have been accepted by Vicky. If no such offer is present, Vicky cannot accept. As a result, the message left by Vicky on the answering machine of Ajaz can only be considered as a fresh offer to purchase the BMW car for 11,000. The law requires that there should be an offer that has to be accepted for the purpose of creating a valid contract. However in the present case it needs to be noted that while the advertisement issued by Ajaz cannot be considered as an offer because it was an invitation to treat, Vicky has not accepted the offer during the phone call made by her to Ajaz. At the same time, during this conversation, Vicky had not made any offer to Ajaz. She merely stated that she wanted more time to think. As mentioned above, the result of making a counter-offer is that the original offer is destroyed. As a result in the present case also, there is no offer present that could have been accepted by Vicky. At the same time, due to the fact that the message containing acceptance on part of Vicky was not received by Ajaz, acceptance cannot be considered as having been conveyed to Ajaz.
Conclusion: As a result of the above mentioned discussion, it can be said in the present case that there is no valid contract between Vicky and Ajaz. The reason is that there was no offer present that could have been accepted by Vicky. At the same time, it also needs to be noted that the postal rule of acceptance is not applicable in case of instantaneous communications. On the other hand, the law contract requires that for creating a valid contract, there should be an offer which should be accepted in the same way by the other party. As these requirements were not fulfilled in the present case, there is no contract between Vicky and Ajaz.