Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. We have seen the various case laws i.e., in case of Rees v. De Bernardy (1985 R. 323) (Ch. D) (1896) p. 437. In this decision, the, Privy Council has held "that the agreement was in the nature of champerty and void. It was further held that the agreement must be set aside as an improvident bargain which D. had obtained by taking an unfair advantage of his position.

9. In the case of Hussain Bakhsh & Anr. (Plaintiffs) v. Rahmat Hussain & Anr. (Defendants)

10. After going through the details of these cases, we find that issue in these cases was whether the agreements entered between the parties were void or valid, but nowhere the question was whether income earned out of those void or valid agreements were taxable or not. In these cases, the first court has decided the issue in favor of plaintiff by holding that the agreements were valid. However, on further appeal by the defendant, whereby the validity of agreement was challenged, it was held that because the agreement was void, therefore, no award can be awarded on account of that agreement.