Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

28. I propose to deal with both the submissions canvassed by Mr. Dave. I shall first deal with the first submission as regards section 202 of the Contact Act. Section 202 of the Contract Act reads thus:-

"Section 202:- Termination of agency where agent has an interest in subject matter.- Where the agent has himself an interest in the property which forms the subject-matter of the agency, the agency cannot, in the absence of an express contract, be terminated to the prejudice of such interest."

29. I may quote a passage from Cunningham & Shephard's Contract Act, 11th Edition, 2007-08 on the subject of section 202 of the Contract Act:-

"Section 201 declares generally that an agent's authority is terminated in certain manners detailed therein. The present section and secs 204 and 208 lay down exceptions, to the general rule embodied in Sec.201. The exceptional case dealt in the present section is that in which the authority or power is coupled with an interest in the thing on which the power is to be exercised. The section is defective in that it omits to state under what circumstances an agent can be said to have an interest in the subject matter of agency.
The words, "an interest in the property which forms the subject-matter of the agency", occurring in Sec.202 of the Contract Act, are of wide amplitude than the words "interest in or charge on, such property" in Sec. 54 of the Transfer of Property Act.
On a conjoint reading of Sec.53-A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and Sec.202 of the Contract Act, 1872, the effect is that transferor of a property who has executed an agreement to sell and a power of attorney, though continued to be the legal owner of the property as per title deed yet all his powers were taken away and such powers were vested in the person in whose favour the agreement to sell and power of attorney was executed."

218). The German jurist jhoring viewed law as a reconciler of conflicting interests. Roscoe found as regards human disorders and claims as interests which exist independently of the law and which are constantly "pressing for recognition and security." (Philosophy of Law, Revised ' Edition, 1954). In the American Restatement of the Law of torts (Second Edition, 1965) the word "interest" is used to denote the object of any human desire.

33. For the purposes of the Law of Contract, therefore, it would not be appropriate to restrict the meaning of the word "interest" by the narrow compass in which this word is used at times in relation to immovable property. For instance, the last sentence of section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act states that a contract for sale of itself does not create any interest in or charge on immovable property. Similarly, section 17(1)(b) of the Registration Act makes only those documents compulsorily registerable which create, declare, assign, limit or extinguish any right, title or interest, whether vested or contingent, of the value of one hundred rupees and upwards to or in immovable property. Since an agreement for sale does not create such a right, title or interest, it may not be compulsorily registerable. But in the context of the Contract Act, it cannot be said that a person who is the beneficiary of an agreement of sale has no right or interest in the subject-matter of the sale. He has a legally enforceable right and interest in enforcing the contract of sale by the execution of a sale deed and in getting possession of the property agreed to be sold under the provisions of the Specific Relief Act. In the English Common Law, the specific performance of contracts was a part of the law of contract. This is why Chapter IV of the Contract Act deals with the performance of contracts which includes the performance of contracts relating to immovable property also. In fact, section 4 of the Transfer of Property Act says that the chapters and sections of that Act which relate to contracts shall be taken as part of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Therefore, the power of attorney holder, in whose favour the plaintiffs had executed the irrevocable power with respect to the suit property, could be said to have an interest in the subject matter of the contract for the purposes of section 202 of the Contract Act if not for the purposes of the Transfer of Property Act and the Registration Act, 1908. (see Harbans Singh vs. Shanti Devi (1977) ILR 2 Delhi 649).