Ramlah, a supplier of school equipment sent an email to Zaril on 24 April 2021 requiring him to supply her a quotation of 300 units of school desks. On the same day, Zaril sent her the requested quotation at total price of RM12 000. On 26 April 2021, Zaril made an order of 300 units of school desk to ABC Sdn Bhd to be delivered to Ramlah.

Ramlah on the other hand had made a purchase order to XYZ Sdn Bhd on 28 April 2021 for the supply of 300 units of school desks at the price of RM10,000. It was agreed that Ramlah paid half of the price,while the remaining balance was to be made at delivery scheduled on 5 June 2021. Two days before the delivery, the factory was seriously damaged by a flash flood.

Consequently, XYZ Sdn Bhd was unable to deliver the order as agreed. On the same day, Zaril called Ramlah requesting her to specify the date of delivery of the 300 units and make the payment of the quoted price. Ramlah refused to pay as she claimed that she had never made an order from him. Zaril threatened to sue her in the court for breach of contract.

Meanwhile, on 5 June 2021, the XYZ Sdn Bhd informed Ramlah of its inability to supply the desks. Ramlah was very upset and wished to sue XYZ Sdn Bhd for breach of contract and refund.

By virtue of Malaysian Contracts Act 1950 and decided case laws, discuss all the contractual issues in the above case. Discuss also the position of Islamic Law relating to the above issues