Case studies on Modern Business Laws: Legal Relationship,Agreements with Minor,Joint Promises, Illegal Agreements,Doctrine of Supervening Impossibility:

2. Q.X invites Y to a dinner at his house. Y accept the offer. X
by spending a lot of money makes grand arrangements for
the dinner. But Y fails to attend the dinner. Can X recover
the loss sustained by filing a case against Y?
*** No .
Because there is no legal relationship created between the
parties and there is no consideration in the agreement.
Where there is no consideration no contract. If there is no
intention to create legal relationship on the part of the
parties. there is no contract between them. Agreements of
a social or domestic nature do not justify legal relationship,
so they are not contracts. If any agreement does not
contain consideration, then it is void agreement. So no
contract.

3. Q.‘A ’gives Rs. 1,00,000 to ‘B' a married women to enable
him to get a divorce and Marry 'A'. Can' ‘A' recover the
money when 'B' refuses to marry 'A' after divorce?
*** No.
A cannot recover the amount from B because it is an
agreement which is immoral in nature and hence, it is
void being opposed to public policy. An agreement in
contemplation of diverse is void. In Baivijli v Nanda
Nagar case, married women was given money to
enable her to obtain divorce from her husband and
then to Marry the lender. Held, the agreement was
immoral and the lender couldn't recover the money.

4. Q.X agreed to let his music hall on a rental basis to Y
from a particular date. But before that date, the music
hall was burnt by fire. Can Y file a suit against X?
*** No.
Y cannot file a suit against X because the case of
contract covered under “Doctrine of Supervening
Impossibility” that is destruction of subject matter
before performance of obligation. When the subject
matter of a contract, subsequent to its formation, is
destroyed without any fault of the parties to the
contract, the contract is discharged. Impossibility which
arises subsequent to the formation of a contract is called
supervening impossibility.

5. Q.Kallu, Mallu and Gallu promise to pain rupees
150000/_to Dallu. On due date, Kallu and Mallu are
not traceable. Can Dallu recover the amount only from
Gallu? Comment.
*** Yes.
Dallu can recover the amount from Gallu. As it is
devaluation of joint liabilities. When two or more
persons made a joint promise, all such persons must
jointly fulfill the promise. In the absence any of the
joint promiser, the promisee may compel anyone or
more of the joint promises to perform the whole of the
promise.
Joint promises is called as Devolution of joint liabilities
means passing over from one person to another.

6. Q.A member of parliament or member of the legislative
house of the state or person holding office of profit
shall be appointed as the Chief Information
Commissioner. Elucidate under RTI Act 2005.
***Not appointment.
Holding the office of profit is not an appointment.
According to home RTI act 2005, The Chief
Information Commissioner or an Information
Commissioner shall not be a Member Parliament or
Member of Legislature of any state or Union Territory
or hold any other office of profit or connected with any
political party.

7. Q.Prashant, while swimming in the river, cries for help,
as he was about to sink. Pravin rescues Prashant for
which, Prashant promises to pay Praveen, a reward of
Rs 5000. But Prashant fails to keep up his promise. Can
Pravin recover the amount from Prashant in the court
of law?
***Yes.
Praveen can recover the amount in the court of law.
There is a valid contract between Prashanth and
Praveen. Section 25 of Indian Contract Act 1872,
compensation for voluntary services creates valid
contract. A promise made without consideration is
valid to compensate a person who has already
voluntarily or done after request for the promiser is
legally compellable to do.

8. Q.A girl of 10 years, obtains a loan of rupees 7000 from a
money lender. She fails to repay the loan. Can the money
lender file a suit against the girl to recover the amount of
the loan?
*** No.
The money lender cannot file a suit against the girl to
recover the amount of the loan. The contract with minor is
void ab initio i.e. from the beginning. The girl can claim
her minority at any time. She is not bound to repay the
loan.

9. Q. Radha enters into a contract with Krishna that she
would sing at night for one week at a theatre for a
remuneration of rupees 500 per day. Radha Sings at
night for 4 days subsequently. She fell ill. Can Krishna
ask for damages for loss of income from Radha?
***No.
Krishna can not ask for damages for loss of income
from Radha. It is discharge of contract due to
impossibility of performance. Doctrine of supervening
impossibility is applied in this case. Personal
incapacity of the promisor, discharge the contract on
the death, illness or incapacity of that party.

10. Q.‘A’ agrees to pay Rs 10000 to be ‘B', if 'B' beats 'C'. ‘B’
beats 'C'.’A’ refuses to pay rupees 10000 to 'B'. Whether
'B' can approach the court to recover the agreed amount?
***No.
‘B’ cannot recover the amount from 'A'. Because, object of
the Agreement is illegal. An unlawful Agreement is not
enforceable by law. It is void ab initio. Both 'A' and 'B' are
of equal guilt.

11. Q. Sanju offers mobile to Manju without any
consideration because at one time Manju’s father had
given Rs 10,000 to Sanju. Manju accept the offer. Is this
a valid contract?
*** Yes.
It is a valid contract. No consideration, no contract .It
is not applicable to completed gifts. A gift does not
require any consideration in order to be valid. It is
binding even though without consideration.

12. Q.M offer a reward to anyone who would rescue his
dead or alive wife from a burning building. A fire man
risking his life brought out the wife’s dead body. Is he
entitled to recover the reward?
*** Yes.
Fireman is entitled to recover the reward. Section 25
of the Indian Contract Act 1872, compensation for
voluntary services creates valid contract. A promise
made without consideration is valid to compensate a
person who has already voluntarily or done after
request for the promiser is legally compellable to do.

13. Q.A is a minor aged17,broke his arm in a hockey game.
He engaged a qualified doctor to operate and treat.
Does the given doctor have valid claim for his services?
***Yes.
The doctor have valid claim for his services. But the
doctor can recover the amount only from minors
estate. Sec. 68 of Indian Contract Act 1872 specifies , a
minor is liable for necessaries supplied to him. Person
supplying necessaries to a minor is entitled to be
reimbursed out of the minor’s property.

14. Q.For valid consideration from B, A makes a promise to
'B' to render some services to 'C’. ‘C’ sues 'A' on the
promise. Discuss whether he can succeed?
***No.
‘C’ cannot succeed. The general rule of law that only
parties to a contract may sue. The rule is called
Doctrine of privity. It means that a person who is not a
party to a contract cannot sue upon it even though the
contract is for benefit and he provided consideration.
Thus, if there is a contract between A and B , C cannot
enforce it.

15. Q.'P' sold his business to 'Q' without disclosing this to
his customer. One 'M' old customer of 'P' sent an order
for goods to 'P' by name. But the new owner executed
the order. Is 'M' bound to accept the goods?
***No.
'M' is not bound to accept the goods. When an offer is
made to a particular person, it can be accepted by him
alone. If it is accepted by any other person, there is no
valid acceptance. If 'M' proposes to make a contract
with 'P' , 'Q' cannot substitute himself for 'P' without
'M's consent. So 'M' is not bound to accept the goods.

16. Q.Ram hired a hall from Shyam for a period of one year
and paid rent in advance after 6 month the hall was
destroyed in fire. Ram claims refund will he succeed?
***No. Ram cannot claim the refund. Destruction of
subject matter of contract is governed under
supervening impossibility which means impossibility
arises subsequent to the formation of a contract. The
hall was destroyed in fire which was unintentional.
Therefore, Ram cannot claim for the refund.

17. Q.A was cleaning water tank in B's house. A found a
diamond ring in the tank. B claims the ring to be his
own. Decide.
***A person who finds goods belonging to another and
takes them into his custody is subject to the
responsibility as a Bailee.
--Finder of the goods 'A' has a right of lien over the
goods.
--finder of the goods has right to sue for reward.
-- finder of the goods date of sale is the owner cannot
with reasonable diligence be found, if owner refuses to
pay the lawful charges.