Factual Situation: The plaintiffs offered to provide delivery of a machine tool for a price of ` 75,535. The delivery of the tool was set for 10 months, with the condition that orders only qualified as accepted once the terms in the quotation were met and prevailed over any of the buyer's terms. The buyer responded to the offer with their own terms and conditions, which did not include the 'price variation clause' listed in the seller's terms. This included a response section which required a signature and to be returned in order to accept the order. The sellers returned this response slip with a cover letter signaling that delivery would be in accordance with their original quotation. The tool was ready for delivery but the buyers could not accept delivery, for which the sellers increased the price which was in line with their initial terms. This was denied by the buyer and an action was brought by the seller to claim the cost of delay and interest. Was a contract made with or without a price variation clause? (AILET 2018)

Each question consists of legal principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such proposition may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this section. You have to apply the principles to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Only one of the alternatives, i.e., (A), (B), (C), or (D) is the most reasonable conclusion. Remember: you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given for every question.