Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Durga Prasad Vs Baldeo

    Uploaded by

    Ganesh Anantharam
    2K views4 pages
    This case analyzes the invalid agreement between Durga Prasad and Baldeo due to lack of proper consideration. The introduction provides background that without proper consideration between parties, there is no legitimate contract. Durga Prasad constructed some outlets that were rented to Baldeo for business, but Baldeo did not pay the promised 5% commission on all sales. Baldeo argued the contract was invalid as the construction was not done with his prior consideration or intention. The court ruled in favor of Baldeo, citing section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act that an agreement without consideration is void.

    Original Description:

    Case law

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This case analyzes the invalid agreement between Durga Prasad and Baldeo due to lack of proper consideration. The introduction provides background that without proper consideration between parties, there is no legitimate contract. Durga Prasad constructed some outlets that were rented to Baldeo for business, but Baldeo did not pay the promised 5% commission on all sales. Baldeo argued the contract was invalid as the construction was not done with his prior consideration or intention. The court ruled in favor of Baldeo, citing section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act that an agreement without consideration is void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2K views4 pages

    Durga Prasad Vs Baldeo

    Uploaded by

    Ganesh Anantharam
    This case analyzes the invalid agreement between Durga Prasad and Baldeo due to lack of proper consideration. The introduction provides background that without proper consideration between parties, there is no legitimate contract. Durga Prasad constructed some outlets that were rented to Baldeo for business, but Baldeo did not pay the promised 5% commission on all sales. Baldeo argued the contract was invalid as the construction was not done with his prior consideration or intention. The court ruled in favor of Baldeo, citing section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act that an agreement without consideration is void.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 4

    Eie Eaa Vew Hitory Bookmaks Joo Help

    CASE ANALYSIS OF DURGA PR X

    8 https://www.nslriin/case-analysis-of-durga-prasad-v-baldeo -and-otheres/

    Abstract

    This case deals with the invalid agreement because of lack of proper consideration between

    the parties. Ihe parties having no proper consideration means no legitimate contract

    between the parties. According to the indian Contract Act,1872 it clearly mentioned that

    "the contract without consideration is void.

    Introduction

    This case deals with the invalid agreement because of lack of legitimate consideration

    between the parties. The parties not having any legitimate consideration, therefore it is not a

    proper contract between the parties. As per the Indian Contracts Act, 1872 it clearly explicit

    that "the contract without consideration is void". In contract the consideration of each of the

    parties is important, otherwise it become void. During this case, there was no legitimate

    consideration between the parties throughout the course of agreement and created the

    contract void and there was no personal profit for the dedication, the plaintiff on the ground

    that the construction of the shop wasn't done at the need of the defendant however was

    done as per the instructions of the district collectorll.

    CASE NAME Durga Prasad v. Baldeo and others

    cITATION (1881) ILR3ALL221

    cOURT Allahabad High Court


    eG4

    Eile Edt yew Higtory Bookmarks Tools Help

    CASE ANALYSIS OF DURGA PR. X+

    https:/www.nsirjin/case-analysis-of-durga-prasad-v-baldeo-and-atheres/

    cOURT Allahabad High Court

    BENCH Mr.Justice Pearson, Mr. Justice Oldfield

    DECIDED ON 3 March,1880

    RELEVANTACTS /SECTIONS Section 2ld), 25 of Indian Contract Act 1872

    Facts

    The plaintift requested the district collector to construct some outlets in his city. Those

    outlets got for rent to the defendant for doing business

    The rent was conjointly affixed. Later, the defendant had assured to the plaintiff that he will

    be offering a 5% commission to him on all commodities that he will going to sell through

    that shop in consideration of the construction of the building by the plaintiff by

    disbursement immense cash.

    However, the defendant did not pay the commission. Therefore, Durga Prasad filed a suit

    against the shopkeepers who failed to offer the commission.

    Issues before the Court:

    Whether the contract is valid or not


    Whether this is legitimate contract or not?

    4) 328/032

    Eile Edit Xe Hgtory gookmarks Jools elp

    fCASE ANALYSIS OF DURGA PR X+

    6httpsu//www.nslrjin/case-analysis-of-durga-prasad-v-baldeo-and-otheres/

    Plaintiff Contention

    The plaintiff contended that the defendant assured to offer a 5% commission for all the

    articles sold through the that shop, and also the articles are sold-out. And because the

    defendant's act of the construction of the building therefore, it makes it a legitimate

    contract. So, the derendant IS meant to ofrer the s% commission.

    Defendant Contention

    The construction of the building was made without the prior consideration of the

    defendant. The defendant never showed any intention to construct the building. So, the

    ContractIs nvaia

    Ratio of the Case

    In this case, the rule of law upon that the judgement was drawn was Section 2[d) of Indian

    Contract ACt, 1872| states that, when, at the desire of the promiser, the promise or the

    other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises

    to do or to abstain from doing, something. such an act or abstinence or promise is called the

    consideration tor promise. The principles of law set during this case are- Section 2(d)

    followed by the Section 25|ilof the act clearly states that "any agreement without

    consideration is void. The Indian Contract Act (1872) is thorough and imperative and clearly

    specifies that the any agreement without consideration is void. And the Judges also

    contended that there's no case for second appeal and dismissed it with the costs.
    Related Cases

    1,Abdul Aziz vs. Masum Ali, (1914)[iv

    e d/28/202

    You might also like