Professional Documents
Culture Documents
chetti;
Exceptions:
1. Services rendered out side the scope of
official obligations
Glassbrook Brothers Ltd Vs. Glamorgan
County Council.
2. Legal obligations imposed by a contract
Ramchandra Chintaman Vs. KaluRaju
Privity of Contract or Doctrine of Privity:
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre co Vs. Selfridge &
Co;
Jamna Das Vs. Ram Autar;
Beswick Vs. Beswick;
Exceptions:
1.Beneficieries of the contact i.e, under
Trust or Charge or other Arrangements;
Rana Umanath Baksh Singh Vs.Jang
Bahadur;
Gregory & Parker Vs. Williams;
2. Marriage Settlement, Partition & other
Family Arrangements:
Khwaja Muhammad Khan Vs. Hussaini
Begum;
Rose Fernandez Vs. Joseph Gonslaves;
Shappu Ammal Vs. Subramaniyam
3. Acknowledgement or Estoppel:
Devraja Vs. Ram Krishnaiah;
Kshirodebehari datta Vs. Mangobinda
Panda;
4. Covenants running with land:
Tulk Vs. Moxhay;
Smith & Snipes Hall Farm Ltd Vs. River
Douglas Catchment Board
NUDUM PACTUM
Ex-nudo Pactum non oritur actio i.e, out
of a naked pact, no cause of action can
arise.
An agreement without consideration is
void.
A promise in order to be enforceable
must have consideration, because only a
consideration can establish legal
obligation and create legal rights
between the parties.
Sec.25 An agreement made without
consideration is void unless-
(1) It is in writing and registered; or
(2) Is a promise to compensate for
something done; or
(3) is a promise to pay a debt barred by
limitation law;
Expl.IGift;
Expl-II ---- Inadequacy of consideration
Exceptions
1. Natural love and affection;
Raj lukhy Dabee Vs. Bhoothnath
Mookerjee;
Bhiwa Vs. Shivaram ;
2. Past voluntary service;
Sindha Shri Ganapath Singh Vs.
Abraham;
3.Time-barred debt:
R.Suresh Chandra & Co Vs. Vadnese
Chemical Works
4.Gift
5. Agency;(Sec.185)
6.Remission(Sec. 63)
7. Contract of Guarantee (Sec.127)
Rule in Pinnels Case
payment of a lesser sum on the day in
satisfaction of a greater, cannot be any
satisfaction for the whole, because it
appears to the Judges that by no
possibility, a lesser sum can be a
satisfaction to the plaintiff for a greater
sum: but the gift of a horse, hawk, or
robe, etc. in satisfaction is good. For it
shall be intended that a horse, hawk, or
robe might be more beneficial to the
plaintiff than the money.
Foakes Vs.Beer
Couldery v Bartrum