Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 29 (3.02 seconds)Section 25 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Sale Of Goods Act, 1930
Section 23 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872 [Entire Act]
The Indian Contract Act, 1872
Section 25 in The Companies Act, 1956 [Entire Act]
I.T.C. Limited vs George Joseph Fernandes & Anr on 6 February, 1989
19.Indeed, a mutual mistake takes place where the respective parties take a divergent stand based on misunderstanding and there being no 'Consensus Ad Idem' and in such an event, there is no agreement and the said contract is a void one, as per decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ITC Limited V. George Joseph Fernandes, AIR 1989 SC 839.
Ranganayakamma & Anr vs K.S. Prakash (D) By Lrs. & Ors on 16 May, 2008
31.In regard to the plea of 'Lack of Consideration', it must be proved by an individual who alleges it, as per decision Ranganayakamma V. K.S.Prakash, AIR 2009 SC (Supp) 1218. Apart from that, a consideration is to be real and not illusory one, although the adequacy of consideration being an issue for the respective contracting parties to agree in this regard.
Ku. Sonia Bhatia vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 17 March, 1981
32.One has to bear in mind that an adequate consideration would not include 'Love', 'Affection' or 'Spiritual Benefit' as involved in a gift, as per decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sonia Bhatia V. State of U.P., (1981) 2 SCC 585. An agreement without consideration is a 'Gratuitous Promise' and such a promise is an unenforceable one, unless it comes within the first clause described in Section 25(1) of the Indian Contract Act.
Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd. vs Union Of India on 13 May, 1981
34.To put it succinctly, the ingredients of Section 70 and part 3 of Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 are based on the plea of 'Restitution' which logically prevents an 'Unjust Enrichment' by retaining anything received by a party which does not belong to him and he should return it to the person from whom he received it and if action is not possible, then, monetary compensation is to be paid, as per decision Great Eastern Shipping Company Limited V. Union of India reported in AIR 1971 Calcutta 150 at page 155.