IMPORTANCE OF CONSIDERATION

Consideration is the foundation of ever contract. The law insists on the e istence of consideration if a !ro"ise is to #e enforced as creatin$ le$al o#li$ations. A !ro"ise without consideration is null and void. It is called a na%ed !ro"ise or &Nudum Pactum.& Thus if A !ro"ise to !a' ( Rs. )*** without an'thin$ in return+ this constitute a #are !ro"ise and $ives no ri$ht of action. Sir ,illia" Anson has #rou$ht out the i"!ortance of consideration thus+ &offer and acce!tance #rin$s the !arties to$ether+ and constitute an outward se"#lance of a contract+ #ut "ost s'ste"s of law re-uires so"e further evidence of the intention of the !arties and in default of such evidence+ refuse to reco$ni.e an o#li$ation./ This further evidence of the intention of the !arties is su!!lied #' consideration which is one of the ele"ent of a valid contract. Section 01 of the Indian contract Act su!!orts this contention and !rovides that a$ree"ent without consideration is void.

R23ES RE4ARDIN4 MINOR/S A4REEMENT

A "inor/s a$ree"ent #ein$ void is wholl' devoid of all effects. ,hen there is no contract there should #e no contractual o#li$ation on either side. ). An agreement with or by minor is void Section )* of the Indian Contract Act re-uires that the !arties to a contract "ust #e co"!etent and Section )) sa's that a "inor is not a co"!etent. (2t either section "a%es it clear whether the contract

entered into #' a "inor is void or voida#le. Till )5*6+ court in india wee not unani"ous on this !oint the !riv' council "ade it !erfectl' clear that a "inor is not co"!etent to a contract and that a contract #' "inor is void ab initio. The leadin$ case is7 MOHRI BIBI V. DHARMO DAS GHOSE ( !"#$ &A "inor #orrowed Rs. 0**** fro" ( and as a securit' for the sa"e e ecuted a "ort$a$e in his favor. He became a major a few months later and filled a suit for the declaration that the mortgage executed by him during his majority was void and should be cancelled. It was held that a mortgage by a minor was void and B was not entitled to replacement of money. 0. %o rati&i'ation An a$ree"ent with the "inor is co"!letel' void. A "inor cannot ratif' the a$ree"ent even on attainin$ "a8orit'+ #ecause a void a$ree"ent cannot #e ratified. A !erson who is not co"!etent authori.e an act cannot $ive it validit' #' ratif'in$. (ut If on #eco"in$ "a8or+ "inor "a%es a new a new !ro"ise for fresh consideration+ then this new !ro"ise will #e #indin$. 6. Minor 'an be a (romise or bene&i'iary If a contract is #eneficiar' to a "inor it can #e enforced #' hi". Their is no restriction on a "inor fro" #rin$ a #eneficiar'+ for e a"!le+ #ein$ a !a'ee or a !ro"isee in a contract. Thus a "inor is ca!a#le of !urchasin$ i""ova#le !ro!ert' and he "a' sue to recover the !ossession of the !ro!ert' u!on tender of

the !urchase "one'. Si"ilarl' a "inor in whose favor a !ro"issor' note has #een e ecuted can enforce it. 9. %o esto((e) against a minor ,here a "inor #' "isre!resentin$ his a$e has induced the other !art' enter into a contract with hi"+ he cannot #e "ade lia#le on the contract. There can #e no esto!!el a$ainst a "inor. It "eans he is not esto!!el fro" !leadin$ his infanc' in order to avoid a contract. 1. %o S(e'i&i' (er&orman'e E*'e(t in 'ertain 'ases A "inor/s contract #ein$ a#solutel' void+ there can #e no -uestion of the s!ecific !erfor"ance of such contract. A $uardian of a "inor cannot #ind the "inor #' an a$ree"ent for the !urchase of i""ova#le !ro!ert' : so the "inor cannot as% for the s!ecific !erfor"ance of the contract which the $uardian had no !ower to enter into. (ut a contract entered into #' $uardian or "ana$er on "inor/s #ehalf can #e s!ecificall' enforced if ;a< The contract is within the authorit' of the $uardian or "ana$er. ;#< It is for the #enefit of the "inor. ;+A+,HA%D V. %ARHAR -! I, -!.< =. +iabi)ity &or torts A trot is a civil wron$. A "inor is lia#le in tort unless the tort in realit' is a #reach of contract. Thus+ where a "inor #orrowed a horse for ridin$ onl' he was held lia#le when the he lent the horse to one of his friends who 8u"!ed and %illed the horse. (ut a "inor cannot #e "ade lia#le for a #reach of contract #' fra"in$ the action on tort. 'ou cannot convert a contract into a tort to ena#le 'ou to sue an infant.

>. %o inso)ven'y A "inor cannot #e declared insolvent as he is inca!a#le of contractin$ de#ts and dues are !a'a#le fro" the !ersonal !ro!erties of "inor and he is not !ersonall' lia#le. ?. /artnershi( A "inor #ein$ inco"!etent to contract cannot #e a !artner in a !artnershi! fir"+ #ut under Section 6* of the Indian Contract Act + he can #e ad"itted to the #enefits of !artnershi!. 5. Minor 'an be an agent A "inor can act as an a$ent. (ut he will not to #e lia#le to his !rinci!al for his acts. A "inor can draw+ deliver and endorse ne$otia#le instru"ents without hi"self #ein$ lia#le. )*. Minor 'annot bind (arent or g0ardian In the a#sence of authorit'+ e !ress or i"!lied+ an infant is not ca!a#le of #indin$ his !arent or $uardian+ even for necessaries. The !arents will #e held lia#le onl' when the child is actin$ as an a$ent for !arents. )). 1oint 'ontra't by minor and ad0)t In such a case+ the adult will #e lia#le on the contract and not the "inor. In Sain Das Vs Ram ,hand2 where there was a 8oint !urchase #' two !urchaser+ one of the" was a "inor. It was held that the vendor could enforce the contract a$ainst the "a8or !urchaser and not the "inor. )0. S0rety &or a minor

In a contract of $uarantee when an adult stands for a "inor then he ;adult< is lia#le to third !art' as there is direct contract #etween the suret' and the third !art'. )6. Minor as Shareho)der A "inor+ #ein$ inco"!etent to contract cannot #e a shareholder of the co"!an'. If #' "ista%e he #eco"e a "e"#er+ the co"!an' can rescind the transaction and re"ove his na"e fro" re$ister. (ut+ a "inor "a'+ actin$ throu$h his lawful $uardian #eco"e a shareholder #' transfer or trans"ission of full' !aid shares to hi". )9. +iabi)ity &or  ne'essaries The case of necessaries su!!lied to a "inor or to an' other !erson who" such "inor is le$all' #ound to su!!ort is $overned #' section =? of the Indian Contract Act. A clai" for necessaries su!!lied to a "inor is enforcea#le #' law. (ut a "inor not lia#le for an' !rice that he "a' !ro"ise and never for "ore than the value of the necessaries. There is no !ersonal lia#ilit' of the "inor+ #ut onl' his !ro!ert' is lia#le. 3o render minor4s estate )iab)e &or ne'essaries two 'onditions m0st be satis&ied. ;a< The contract "ust #e for the $oods reasona#l' necessar' for his su!!ort in his station in life. ;#< The "inor "ust not have alread' a sufficient su!!l' of these necessaries.