Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: consideration indian contract act Page 1 of about 92,844 results (0.540 seconds)

Mar 11 1936 (PC)

The National Petroleum Company Ltd. Vs. Popatlal Mulji

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1936Bom344; (1936)38BOMLR610; 165Ind.Cas.338

..... though the circumstances did not bring into existence an obligation in the nature of a trust in his favour. it was said in that case that the definition of ' consideration' in the indian contract act is much wider than the definition in england, and that in british india, the aim should be to do complete justice in one suit, and therefore, the rights of ..... are a recognized exception to the general principle that only parties to a contract can sue upon it. there seems to me to be nothing in the indian contract act which suggests that that principle does not apply in india. it is true that the definition of ' consideration' in section 2 of the indian contract act gives a wider meaning to that term than is accepted in english ..... law, because it includes consideration moving from the promisee or any other person. but the fact ..... equally well-established principle is that there must be privity of contract for a right of action. the indian law, however, differs from this rule of the english law as to the necessity of consideration moving from the promisee. the definition of consideration in section 2 of the indian contract act is much wider, according to which consideration may move from a third party. but, in my .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 1933 (PC)

Sayamma Dattatraya Narsingrao Vs. Punamchand Raichand Marwadi

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1933Bom413; (1933)35BOMLR850; 147Ind.Cas.1096

..... one may not do. the effect is to defeat the provisions of the law, as the offence under section 406 is not compoundable. therefore, under section 23 of the indian contract act the consideration for the promissory notes is bad.6. turning to the cases, the first case on which the learned counsel for the appellant has relied is kessowji tulsidas v. hurjivan mulji ..... a criminal charge which could not have been compounded. if so, under section 23 of the indian contract act, the consideration was unlawful and the promissory notes cannot be enforced against defendants nos. 2 and 3. reference may also be made to illustration (h) to section 23, of the indian contract act, 1872.8. as to the principles deducible from decided cases, the following propositions can be ..... poona has given him a decree. defendant no. 3 has appealed, and the principal ground taken in appeal is that the consideration for the notes being the withdrawal of the complaint, is against the provisions of section 23 of the indian contract act, and therefore no suit can lie.2. before dealing with this point, i may briefly refer to the argument of the ..... laid down:-firstly, where the consideration for an agreement is a promise not to prosecute for an offence which is non-compoundable, the agreement is not .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 30 1932 (PC)

Sabava Yellappa Vs. Yamanappa Sabu

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1933Bom209; (1933)35BOMLR345

..... defendant no. 1. the object of the deed is alleged by the plaintiff to be either past or future cohabitation. the word 'object' in section 23 of the indian contract act is distinct from 'consideration' and means something aimed at, and has been held to mean 'purpose or design' in the decision in jaffer meher ali v. budge-budge jute mills co i ..... , and therefore, the discussion on this point would appear to be unnecessary. the reasoning, however, appears to me to be unassailable. under section 25 of the indian contract act an agreement is void if made without consideration unless it came within one of the exceptions. clause (2) provides an exception, namely, a promise to compensate, wholly or in part, a person who has ..... to be an object which implies something aimed at simultaneously or in the future. past cohabitation would be consideration for an agreement under section 2(d) of the indian contract act but is not good consideration for a transfer of property. a gift does not require consideration. it is difficult to hold that past cohabitation can be an object of a gift. future cohabitation can ..... separately.13. as regards the sale-deed for an ostensible consideration of rs. 800, no transfer could be made, under section 6(h) of the transfer of property act, for an unlawful object or consideration within the meaning of section 23 of the indian contract act, 1872. section 23 of the indian contract act lays down that the consideration or object of an agreement is lawful unless the court .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 31 1969 (HC)

Bithal Das Vs. Shankar Das Dube

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (1895)ILR17All265

..... that was at the time of the agreement a fully executed and not an executory consideration, and that therefore, with the reference to the definition of the word 'consideration' in section 2 of the indian contract act, that consideration was a bad consideration, and that raja shankar dat took nothing under the agreement. he contends that no express ..... , was not bad for want of consideration. but, even if such were the case, we should still hold that the agreement might well be supported and held to be a good agreement under the provision of section 25(2) and of section 70 of the indian contract act. by the agreement hari har dat promised ..... to compensate shankar for an act which the latter had done for him in allowing his interest in the estate to be taken by the ..... his refraining from suing his brother to recover the loss and damage which that brother's extravagance had entailed on him is in our opinion a good consideration for the agreement, of june 17th, 1889. and further there is the promise by shankar dat to make his brother the generous allowance of rs. ..... 's debts, and the agreement of june 13th, 1879, shows that shankar dat did not intend to perform that act gratuitously. we have no hesitation in holding that a very adequate consideration was given for the agreement of june 17th, 1889, and that hari har dat felt he could not resist the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 09 1906 (PC)

Ashidbai Vs. Abdulla Haji Mahomed

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1906)8BOMLR652

..... in norman v. thompson, 'the agreement by each individual to give up part of his claim is a sufficient consideration.' the definition of the term 'consideration' in the indian contract act is wide enough to embrace this principle and make it applicable to a case like the present. according to that definition, ..... the act which forms the consideration for a promise need not be the act of the, promisee; it may be the act of some other person. ..... indian contract act, on which mr. inverarity has rested his client's case, do not apply here. the case resolves itself into one of an ordinary plaintiff impeaching a deed to which he has been a party. the onus lies on him to make out a case for setting aside on equitable grounds a deed duly executed for valuable consideration ..... property, having regard to the provisions of section 53 of the indian trusts act. but that circumstance cannot affect the validity of the deed as a whole, though the mortgage may be void. it forms part of the consideration which moved the defendant to part with his own share; it ..... trust itself as a condition of the trust imposed by the settlor. the word 'trustee' is defined in section 3 of the indian trusts act as one who accepts the confidence; and no confidence is accepted until the deed creating the trust has been executed and the relationship .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 1935 (PC)

Nath Sah Vs. Lala Durga Sah

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1936All160

..... as the debt had become time-barred. a time-barred debt cannot be recovered, and an oral promise to pay a time-barred debt is not a good consideration under section 25, indian contract act. but if the promise to pay a time-barred debt either wholly or in part is made in writing and signed by the person to be charged therewith, then ..... the consideration is not void under sub-section (3) of that section. in the present case the defendant in writing signed by him agreed to pay rs. 900 which apparently ..... merely absent within the meaning of section 44, negotiable instruments act or that part of the consideration had subsequently failed. we therefore hold that the courts below have rightly held that the amount due on the previous promissory note could have been legally included in the consideration for the second contract. the same argument would have applied to the promise to pay interest at ..... was executed before the coming into force of the usurious loans act of 1916. the court held that section 25 was not applicable to such a case. it is difficult to hold that a fresh contract of this kind is in any way illegal, void or ineffective. the mere inadequacy of the consideration cannot be enquired into by the court. nor can it .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 1978 (HC)

Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Doon Apartments (P) Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Reported in : ILR1979Delhi84; 1979RLR7

..... contract act. is the agreement capable of being made certain so that it may not become void ..... clause ii of the written agreement. secondly, the plaintiff does not say that any consideration was agreed between, the parties to support the oral agreement pleaded by the plaintiff. under the indian contract act consideration is essential if the agreement is to be valid. if there is no agreement as to consideration then the agreement is void for uncertainty in view of section 29 of the ..... is not capable of being determined. it is, thereforee, not only void for uncertainty under section 29, but is also void for lack of consideration under section 25 of the contract act. section, 23 of the contract act is as follows : 'the consideration or object of an agreement is lawful, unless it is forbidden by law; or is of such a nature that, if permitted, it ..... under section 29 the plaintiff does not allege that any provision was made between the parties for determining the consideration for the agreement. it was not, thereforee, an agreement, which was capable .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 09 1915 (PC)

Lakshumanan Chettiar and ors. Vs. Bommachi Naicker and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 32Ind.Cas.416

..... interest under exhibit e2 was not binding on him.9. it has now to be considered whether the consideration recited in exhibit a is sufficient. under section 2(d) of the indian contract act there is consideration when, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee has done or abstained from doing something as well ..... is liable, although as a result of the decided cases, no charge is created on the zemindari or its income.12. on the question of consideration, i would have preferred to send the case down for a revised finding as the lower court has not dealt with it properly. it was suggested ..... creditors to take further proceedings against the zemindari and as the decree-holders did abstain for some time taking further proceedings that would, i think, be sufficient consideration. oldershaw v. king 2 h. & n. 517. with reference to the contention that the promisor had been exempted from liability by the decree in ..... k 287 each zemindar takes a life-estate and as pointed out in ramasami naik v. ramasami chetti 30 m.k 255, this fact creates considerable difficulties in the way of mortgaging the zemindari. in that case it was held that the mortgage executed by the present 5th defendant and other reversioners ..... the case should be disposed of on the materials placed before us. the consideration for the promise, in my opinion, is that the zemindari to which the 1st defendant had a prospective right of succession was saved by the act of the plaintiff. i agree in the order proposed by the learned chief .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 08 2004 (HC)

Allahabad Bank and anr. Vs. Mecon

Court : Jharkhand

Reported in : AIR2005Jhar54; II(2005)BC387; [2005(1)JCR265(Jhr)]

..... guarantee.17. in course of argument, learned senior counsel for the appellants referred to sections 10 and 25 of the indian contract act and submitted that contract was void for want of consideration, as there was no consideration. he further submitted that consideration is must in a contract. in this connection he has submitted that fdrs deposited by the plaintiff-respondent cannot form or take the shape of ..... commission.21. the learned senior counsel for the appellant, in course of submissions, had submitted that there cannot be a contract between the parties for want of consideration and in this connection he referred to sections 10 and 25 of the indian contract act but repealing that argument the learned senior counsel for the respondent submitted that plaintiff-respondent had deposited more than 10% of ..... favour of the plaintiff-respondent. the learned counsel further submitted that there was a concluded contract according to section 8 of the indian contract act, which may be quoted hereinbelow :'8. acceptance by performing conditions, or receiving consideration.-performance of the conditions of a proposal, or the acceptance of any consideration for a reciprocal promise which may be offered with a proposal, is an acceptance of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 01 1999 (SC)

M/S. Atlas Export Industries Vs. M/S. Kotak and Company

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1999SC3286; (2000)1CALLT1(SC); JT1999(6)SC451; 1999(5)SCALE332; (1999)7SCC61; [1999]Supp2SCR192

..... to them under the ordinary law of india should be held to be opposed to public policy. under section 23 of the indian contract act the consideration or object of an agreement is unlawful if it is opposed to public policy. section 28 and exception 1 to it, ( ..... opposed to public policy under section 23 read with section 28 of the contract act. it was submitted that atlas and kotak, the parties between whom the dispute arose, are both indian parties and the contract which had the effect of compelling them to resort to arbitration by foreign ..... , hongkong (hereinafter 'oceandale', for short). the agreement was for the supply of 200 mt of indian groundnut extractions of the specifications as to quantity, quality and packages detailed in the contract and to be shipped on or before 30th june, 1980. the price was agreed at us $ ..... question of incorporation arises. where this is not the case, the question whether the document containing the arbitration clause is incorporated in the relevant contract between the relevant parties is, as always, a question of construction.8. in alimenta s.a. v. national agricultural co-operative marketing federation ..... which only is relevant for the purpose of this case) are extracted and reproduced hereunder:28. every agreement, by which any party thereto is restricted absolutely from enforcing his rights under or in respect of any contract .....

Tag this Judgment!

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