Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: agreements indian contract act Page 1 of about 36,766 results (0.112 seconds)

Aug 20 1915 (PC)

Sri Rajah Inuganti Kasturamma Bahadur, Zamindarini Vs. Chelikani Venka ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1916Mad65; 30Ind.Cas.878

..... the promisee.8. the mere fact that at the desire of the promisor the promisee has already done something prior to any agreement [indian contract act, section 2(d)] cannot be sufficient to make any subsequent agreement a contract. it would not amount to a contract if it was no more than a promise to make a gift at the mere will of the promisor [transfer of ..... the indian contract act has not been relied upon. the prayer is that a decree be passed for recovery of the arrears of the alleged allowances after july 1907 from the estate of the late zemindar (who died on 2nd november 1906) in the hands of the defendant.2. the written statement denies both (1) the alleged consideration and (2) generally the agreement to ..... trustee, but nonetheless she would be liable to pay the plaintiff as the heir of her husband, who had contracted this liability and who is not shown to have gone beyond his legal rights to charge the estate with his liability. (see indian contract act, section 25, clause 2 and explanation 2.) no doubt, the parties did not contemplate that the zemindar would die ..... expect any remuneration. whether there was any expectation of remuneration would depend (amongst other things) upon the nature of the service. the effect of section 2(d) of the indian contract act upon each of these distinct sets of circumstances might be different. where acts have been done in the past which might or might not (at the opinion of a party) support a .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 1952 (HC)

The State of Madras Represented by the Collector of West Godawari Vs. ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1953Mad235; (1952)1MLJ689

..... disposal of the land, unless the grant was procured by fraud, misrepresentation or mutual mistake as to any matter of fact essential to the agreement (indian contract act, sections 17, 18 & 20). the grant, therefore, cannot be annulled or revoked by the officer who made the grant, by his ..... principal can. ifthe contention put forward on behalf of thelearned government pleader is accepted, thenit comes to this, that the government as theprincipal can revoke an agreement or grantmade by its duly constituted agent withoutgiving any reasons whatever. i do not thinkthat i should go to the extent contended by thelearned counsel. when ..... of such land within the scope of his authority is binding on government. the other is that a grant like any other disposition arising out of contract can be set aside if it is procured by 'fraud'.....'this decision does not lay down that when the agent of the government, say the tahsildar ..... be, has sold away or assigned rights in certain land by means of a duly stamped and registered document though according to the crown grants act then in force no such registration or stamp for the document was necessary. the grant of a patta is tantamount to assignment by a registered document ..... really and in essence one passed nominally by the collector but under the directions of the board of revenue who themselves have ordered the collector to act in the manner he did under the behest of the government. the result comes to this, that when under ex. b. 20 the board of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 25 1902 (PC)

The Secretary of State for India in Council Represented by the Collect ...

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1902)12MLJ453

..... v. vyankatrav n. surve 8 b.h.c. 1:-ed., misrepresentation, or mutual mistake as to any matter of fact essential to the agreement (indian contract act, section 17, 18 and 20). the grant, therefore, cannot be annulled or revoked by the officer who made the grant, his successor ..... registration act, the question t for consideration is reduced to this--whether in fact a grant or assignment has been made to the ..... (dated 28th march 1895 already referred to) that disposals of land, under the ordinary darkhast rules, need not be made by deed, contract or other instrument made and executed in any particular form. there can hardly be any doubt that all waste lands, whether assessed or ..... with the provisions of the said statutes. the crown grants (india) act vii of 1895 exempts crown grants from the operation of the transfer of property act (1882) and section 17(j) and 90(d) of the indian registration act (1877) exempt from registration, ' grants of immoveable property by government ..... ' and 'all documents purporting to be or to evidence grants or assignments by government of land or of any interest in land.'11. having regard therefore to the two admissions above referred to, made by the counsel for the crown and the provisions of the crown grants act and the indian .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1906 (PC)

Muthu Veera Vandayan Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1906)ILR29Mad461

..... disposal of the land, unless the grant was procured by fraud, misrepresentation or mutual mistake as to any matter of fact essential to the agreement (indian contract act, sections 17, 18 and 20). the grant, therefore, cannot be annulled or revoked by the officer who made the grant, by his ..... if the court is of opinion that there has been no irregularity. if no grant has been made, there is no contract. if grant has been made, there is a coii'litional contract.11. in the collector of salem v. rangappa i.l.r. 12 mad. 404 a patta which had been issued to ..... in such a matter, it is equally incompetent to interfere with the appellate darkhast authority in regard to the same matter, so long as that authority acts within the scope of its authority for that would, in effect, be an assumption of the appellate jurisdiction by the civil court instead of by the ..... to assume to themselves the appellate powers thus conferred on other authorities, it would, of course, be different if the revenue authorities, purporting to act under the darkhast rules, acted outside the scope of their authority, but that is not the present case. in the case of subbaraya v. the sub-collector of chingleput ..... grant by reason of the subordinate officer not having observed the formalities prescribed by the darkhast rules or for any other reason, notwithstanding that the granting offioer acted within the scope of his authority ' sappani asari v. the collector of coimbatore i.l.r. 26 mad. 742 and again the same learned judge .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 31 1919 (PC)

Wolf and Sons Vs. Dadiba Khimji and Co.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1919)21BOMLR986; 58Ind.Cas.465

..... property transferred under them have ever been or could be exercised in the present case.40. i am, therefore, of opinion that the agreements entered into by the liquidator with the defendants were 'contracts' within the meaning of the indian contract act and could not be avoided under section 21 as being made under any mistake of law that being so, i am further of ..... to be void.' i agree with the learned trial judge that the word 'agreement' as used in that section does not apply to the pre-war contracts, for they were 'contracts' within the meaning of the indian contract act and not 'agreements'. as regards the subsequent agreements, the parties knew all the material facts and i doubt whether the words 'discovered to be void' are really applicable to ..... those agreements (see gulabchand v. fulbai (1909) i.l.r. 33 bom. 411 ; 11 bom .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 26 1968 (HC)

Jeevraj and anr. Vs. Lalchand and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Reported in : AIR1969Raj192

..... other view is that it imports an implied promise to pay, and, therefore, it is as good an agreement under the indian contract act as any other agreement, and if such an agreement is enforceable at law under the provisions of the contract act, a suit can be founded on it.36. the controversy on this point took a serious turn after their lordships of the privy council ..... such an acknowledgment may not be sufficient to form the basis of the suit. unless, there are bilateral acts which give rise to an agreement enforceable at law under the provisions of the indian contract act, there can be no question of a unilateral transaction forming the basis of a suit for, after all, what is sought to be enforced in a court of law ..... is a right accruing on a breach of a term of a contract, though such contract may contain an implied promise to pay. the indian contract act ..... privy council never meant that the principle of english law should be applied in india specially in view of the indian provisions contained in section 19 of the indian limitation act, section 25 of the indian contract act and article 1, schedule i of the indian stamp act, while the other high courts have held that this observation has to be given effect to and there was nothing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 29 1954 (HC)

Krishnarao Narayanrao Chawate Vs. Shankar Sahadev Mungekar

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1954)56BOMLR973

..... carry on a business similar to that of the firm within a specified period or within specified local limits; and notwithstanding anything contained in section 27 of the indian contract act, 1872, such agreement shall he valid if the restrictions imposed are reasonable.it was strongly urged that but for this provision the plaintiffs would not have had the right to enforce the ..... , be held to be in restraint of trade. now, section 54 of the partnership act in terms exempts such an agreement from the operation of the rule which renders an agreement in restraint of trade as void under our law provided the restrictions imposed are reasonable.9. section 27 of the indian contract act in broad and comprehensive terms lays down the rule that every ..... , void. section 54 of the partnership act recognises one of the necessary exceptions to that general rule and ..... agreement by which any person is restrained from exercising a lawful trade or business of any kind, is, to that extent .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 1924 (PC)

Atmaram Sakharam Kalkye Vs. Vaman Janardan Kashelikar

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1925Bom210; (1925)27BOMLR290; 87Ind.Cas.490

..... the agreement, according to the view i take of the law, may be terminated by the donor at his pleasure at any time before it is registered.69. there ..... can only result in confusion. further, since the arguments were concluded, my brothers fawcett and mulla have pointed out to me that in india under section 25 (1) of the indian contract act, a voluntary agreement in writing made on account of natural love and affection between parties standing in a near relation to each other is a binding ..... , said that the case of a gift is different, because section 25 of the indian contract act allows the intending donor, in the case of an agreement to make a gift, to withdraw it at his will unless the agreement has been registered, as stated in section 25 of the indian contract act. but this seems to me to beg the question at issue before us. thus take ..... , while in the case of an agreement to make a gift, the intending donor may withdraw it at his will except in the rare cases where an agreement to make a gift is made in favour of a near relation out of love or affection and it has been registered, as provided in section 25 of the indian contract act, 1872. even in that case .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1939 (PC)

The Western Electric Company, Limited Vs. Kailas Chand

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1940Bom60; (1939)41BOMLR1290

..... in the nature of an interlocutory proceeding and normally it will certainly be inconvenient to treat it as if it were a suit where all evidence which will make the agreement voidable by reason of the provisions of the indian contract act will be led. but that will not be a' sufficient answer to refuse to take into consideration the plea whether an ..... refrain from recording it or passing a decree in accordance with it. therefore, the term 'lawful agreement' as used in order xxiii, rule 3, excludes not only unlawful agreements, i.e. the object or consideration for which is unlawful as defined in the indian contract act, but all agreements which on the face of them are void and therefore will not be enforced by the court ..... the full meaning of the words used there. if an agreement put before the court as a compromise on the face of it was a wagering agreement and therefore void under section 30 of the indian contract act, in my opinion, it will not be a, lawful agreement because on the face of it is an agreement which the court will not enforce. the provisions of order ..... . for this purpose no inquiry is necessary because the terms of the agreement themselves will show the defect. the court therefore has to consider whether on the face of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 12 1976 (HC)

P.N. Dorairaj and ors. Vs. N.G. Rajan

Court : Chennai

Reported in : AIR1977Mad243; (1977)1MLJ198

..... defendants. in this connection he relied on s. 65 of the indian contract act. that section reads-"65. when an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void, any person who has received any advantage under such agreement or contract is bound to restore it, or to make compensation for it ..... the second defendant, one of its partners. there was nothing in the cinemas (regulations) act which expressly or by implication bars such benami partnership business.9. under s. 23 of the indian contract act, and agreement is lawful unless it is forbidden by law of the court regards it as opposed to ..... relied on s. 23 of the indian contract act and number of decisions rendered under the abkari act.7. in marudamuthu pillai v. rangaswami moopan (1901) ilr 24 mad 401, which is the earliest in the series of cases cited, the plaintiff entered into an agreement with the defendant that they should be ..... public policy. as pointed out in lindley on partnership, 13th edn., pages 130-131. 'although a statute may in terms apparently prohibit an act or omission, and affix ..... without any dissolution of the partnership or without looking into accounts and that therefore it was void and unenforceable under s. 23 of the indian contract act. it was further contended by the defendants that they were not agreeable to the plaintiff getting out of the partnership before the end .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //