LIABILITY OF A MINOR FOR NECESSARIES

FINAL DRAFT SUBMITTED IN THE PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE COURSE

TITLED –

LAW OF CONTRACTS - Ⅰ

SUBMITTED TO:

Mrs. Sushmita Singh

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR

SUBMITTED BY:

NAME: PRANAV RAJ

COURSE: B.B.A. LL.B (Hons.)

ROLL NO: 2030

SEMESTER: 2ND

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NYAYA

NAGAR, MITHAPUR, PATNA – 800001

1|Page
 DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I hereby declare that the work reported in the B.B.A., LL.B (Hons.) Project Report entitled
“Liability of a minor for necessaries” submitted at Chanakya National Law University is an
authentic record of my work carried out under the supervision of Mrs. Sushmita Singh. I have
not submitted this work elsewhere for any other degree or diploma. I am fully responsible for
the contents of my Project Report.

SIGNATURE OF CANDIDATE

NAME OF CANDIDATE: PRANAV RAJ

CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, PATNA

2|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to thank my faculty Mrs. Sushmita Singh whose guidance helped me a lot with
structuring my project.

I owe the present accomplishment of my project to my friends, who helped me immensely

with materials throughout the project and without whom I couldn’t have completed it in the
present way.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to my parents and all those unseen hands that helped
me out at every stage of my project.

THANK YOU,

NAME: Pranav Raj

COURSE: B.B.A., LL.B. (Hons.)

ROLL NO: 2030

SEMESTER: 2ND

3|Page
 INDEX

INTRODUCTION

* AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

* HYPOTHESIS

* RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

* SOURCES OF DATA

CHAPTER 1: CAPACITY OF CONTRACT

CHAPTER 2: POSITION AND NATURE OF MINOR’S AGREEMENT

CHAPTER 3: COMPENSATIONS UNDER SECTION 64, 65, AND 70

CHAPTER 4: MINOR’S LIABILITY FOR NECESSARIES

CHAPTER 5: WHAT ARE NECESSARIES?

CHAPTER 6: CASES RELATED

CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION WITH SUGGESTIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

4|Page
 INTRODUCTION

A contract is a legally-binding agreement which recognises and governs the rights and duties
of the parties to the agreement. A contract is legally enforceable because it meets the
requirements and approval of the law. An agreement typically involves the exchange of
goods, services, money, or promises of any of those. In the event of breach of contract, the
law awards the injured party access to legal remedies such as damages and cancellation.

A Minor is liable to pay out of his property for ‘necessaries’ supplied to him or to anyone
whom he is legally bound to support. Such claims arise not out of contracts but out of what
called ‘quasi contracts’. If a person supplied necessaries to a minor which he actually needs
or to minor dependents, whom the minor is bound to support, the person who supplies such
necessaries is entitled to be reimbursed from the property of such minor.

A minor who enters into a contract to purchase food, shelter, clothing, medical attention,
and/or other goods or services necessary to maintain the minor’s well-being will generally be
liable for the reasonable value of those goods and services even if the minor disaffirms the
contract.

Yes they can also work and pay for their own things as well if they should want to buy
something for themselves.

5|Page
 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

1) To determine the Capacity of contract of a minor.

2) Analyse the Chapter 5 of Indian Contract Act, Section 68.

3) Identify what are necessaries.

4) To analyse the liability of a minor for necessaries.

HYPOTHESIS

The researcher considers the following hypothesis: A minor is liable to pay for the contract of
necessaries.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Mostly doctrine sources and primary method of research was adopted in the making of this
project.

Few primary and secondary methods were used. Some literary works and books and articles
were referred and the internet through various websites was used extensively for the
collection of data which was required for the study needed for this research.

SOURCES OF DATA

The researcher will be relying on both primary and secondary sources to complete the
project.

1. Primary Sources: Books of Contract

2. Secondary Sources: Magazine, articles and websites.

6|Page
 1. CAPACITY OF CONTRACT

An agreement enforceable by law is a contract.1 Such an agreement creates an obligation

between the parties and is enforceable by law. For entering into a contract, there are certain
essentials-

1. Agreement between two parties

2. The intent of Legal obligation

3. Lawful consideration

4. The condition should be certain with a legal object

5. Free Consent

6. Competency of parties

Capacity to Contract means the persons entering the contract should have the ability to do so.
Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 requires that the parties to a contract shall be
competent to contract and certain people are restricted by law from entering into a contract; if
any of these persons still enter into a contract, it will not be enforceable in law i.e. void. The
competence of the contracting parties is an essential element of a valid contract.

Persons Competent to Contract

Who are competent to contract.—every person is competent to contract who is of the age of
majority according to the law to which he is subject, and who is of sound mind and is not
disqualified from contracting by any law to which he is subject. 2It means that a minor,
person of unsound mind and a person disqualified by law cannot enter into a contract. It is
presumed that these persons do not know what they are doing.

The general theory of law in regard to contracts made by parties affecting their rights and
interests is that there must be full and free consent in order to bind the parties. Consent is an
act of reason combined with deliberation. To constitute a valid and binding contract, a party

1
Section 2(h) in The Indian Contract Act, 1872.
2
Section 11 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872

7|Page
contracting must have the capacity to arrive at a reasoned judgment, as to the consequences
of the transaction he is entering into.3

Persons declared incompetent to contract:

 Minor

 Persons of Unsound mind

 Persons otherwise “disqualified from contracting”

Minor

Age of Majority: As per the law, a minor is a person domiciled in India, under the age of 18
years. In computing the age of any person, the day on which he was born is to be included as
a whole day and he shall be deemed to have attained majority at the beginning of the
eighteenth anniversary of that day.4 Contract by a minor is void ab initio. According to the
Privy Council, section 11 should be literally construed and that only a person who is of the
age of the majority is competent to contract. A minor’s contract is, therefore, ab initio and
wholly void. In the view of the Privy Council, this was also in accordance with the Hindu
Notion of a minor’s incompetence to contract. 5 If a minor enters in a contract, the same
agreement cannot be ratified by him on attaining the age of majority.

False Representation: Law favours the minor in a way that even if minor falsely represents
himself as a major, he can plead minority and rule of estoppel will not apply.

Agreement on behalf of a minor: A contract for the benefit of the minor can only be entered
into by the guardian. A minor, if cannot enter into a contract, still can be a beneficiary of a
contract. Contracts of the betrothal of minors by their parents and guardians have been upheld
on the ground of the custom of the community. 6The contract which the guardian enters into
should be for the purpose of legal necessity.

3
Unsoundness of mind in contract by Aishwarya Padmanabhan,
4
Section 3 in The Majority Act, 1875.
5
Mohori bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose, (1903) 30 Calcutta 539 PC
6
Rose Fernandes v. Joseph Gonsalves, (1924) ILR 48 Bom 673

8|Page
In Raj Rani v. Prem Adib7, a film producer entered into an agreement with a minor girl to
act in a film, and the same agreement was entered into by the father of the minor on her
behalf with the producer. On a breach of the agreement, the minor sued the producer through
her father as next friend. The court held that the agreement with the father was void, seeing
that the consideration moving from the father was the minor’s promise to act, and as the
minor could not in law promise, there was no consideration. On the other hand, had the
consideration moved from the father in the shape of an undertaking by him that his daughter
should act; the father could have sued but could recover only the damages he had suffered.8

Person of Unsound mind

A person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract, if, at the time
when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to
its effect upon his interests. A person, who is usually of unsound mind, but occasionally of
sound mind, may make a contract when he is of sound mind. Similarly, a person who is
usually of sound mind, but occasionally of unsound mind, may not make a contract when he
is of unsound mind. 9The purpose of the law is that the contracting party should be able to
understand the consequences of the contract.

There is generally a presumption in favor of sanity. Sanity implies the capacity to understand
10
and of forming a rational judgment as to a person’s own interests. Unless a person is
adjudged as of unsound mind after severe interrogation, the presumption of sanity prevails.
Extreme old age has always been considered to reduce sanity. The burden of proof to prove
unsoundness of mind lies on the person who alleges it.

Disqualified Persons

Law provides certain rules for the following to enter into a contract:

 Insolvent/Bankrupt: An Insolvent is a person who is unable to pay off his debts and
such proceedings have been initiated by his creditors. For individual debtors, this
means that their incomes are too low for them to pay off their debts. For companies,

7
(1949) 51 Bom LR 256
8
Contract and Specific Relief by Avtar Singh, twelfth edition
9
Section 12 in The Indian Contract Act, 1872.
10
Mulla on the Indian Contract Act, H.S. Pathak, Student’s Edition- Eleventh edition, N.M. Tripathi
Pvt. Ltd., Bombay, 1990

9|Page
 this means that the money flow into the business and its assets are less than its
liabilities. Bankruptcy is a legal declaration of one’s inability to pay off
debts.11 Insolvents lose their status as creditworthy and can enter into contracts only
after their liabilities are discharged. When a debtor is adjudged insolvent, his property
is vested with the official assignee, only who can then enter into contracts relating to
the property of the insolvent.

 Convict: A convict cannot enter into a contract while he is serving his punishment.
However, he can enter into a contract after completion of his punishment. A convict
can also enter into a contract when he is on parole or has been pardoned by the court.
An existing contract with a person who is undergoing imprisonment cannot be
enforced until the conviction is complete unless permission can be obtained from the
Central Government.

 Foreign Sovereigns and Ambassadors: Foreign sovereigns are the representatives of

foreign states. They and their representatives are bestowed upon with certain
privileges and immunities in every country. In India, they cannot enter into a contract
except through their agents residing in India. If they enter into a contract through their
agent, that agent will have the entire liability. Foreign sovereigns and ambassadors
can enter into contracts and enforce those contracts in Indian courts, but they cannot
be proceeded against in courts without the sanction of the Central government.

 Alien enemy: A person who is not a citizen of India is called an alien. The rights and
liabilities of an alien to sue and be sued in respect of a contract generally depend on
whether he is an alien friend or an alien enemy. An alien enemy is a person whose
country is at war with the Republic of India. A contract with an alien enemy is void,
but with an alien friend is valid. A contract entered with an alien friend during peace
will be rendered void on the outbreak of a war with that country. In certain cases (if
the chance of ending the war is within a short period), a contract made before the
outbreak of the war may be suspended during the course of the war and shall be
performed after the war is over. However, the government can put restrictions on the
performance of such contracts if it considers it necessary, on the basis of national
interest.12

11
The difference between insolvency and bankruptcy
12
Persons disqualified by law

10 | P a g e
  Company or statutory bodies: A contract entered into by a corporate body or
statutory body will be valid only to the extent it is within its Memorandum of
Association. Memorandum of Association of a company is a legal document which is
important to its formation. While entering into a contract, the company cannot go
beyond the conditions mentioned in the memorandum of association.

Contract law holds that a contract made by an intoxicated person is voidable at his discretion,
but only if the other party knew or had reason to know the degree of impairment as the person
was incompetent at the time the contract was formed. Also, the capacity of a woman to
contract is not affected by her marriage either under the Hindu or Mohammedan law. A
Hindu female is not on account of her gender, absolutely disqualified from entering into a
contract; and marriage, whatever other effects it may have, does not take away or destroy any
capacity possessed by her in that respect. It is not necessary to the validity of the contract that
her husband should have consented to it.

2. POSITION AND NATURE OF MINOR’S AGREEMENT

1. A contract by a minor is absolutely void: A contract by a minor is absolutely void and

inoperative. Further where a minor is charged with obligations and the other contracting
party seeks to enforce those obligations against minor, the contract is deemed as void ab
initio. A minor’s contract being absolutely void, neither he nor the other party acquires
any rights or incurs any liability under the contract. So a minor is neither liable to perform
what he has promised to do under a contract, nor is he liable to repay money that he has
received under it. The principle behind this ruling is, a minor is incapable of judging what
is good for him. A minor, however, can derive benefits under the Act. That means, a
minor can be a beneficiary i.e. a payee, an endorsee or a promise under the Act.

2. A minor cannot be compelled to compensate for or refund any benefit which he has
received under a void contract: Section 64 and 65 of the Contract Act, which deal with
restitution, apply only to contracts between competent parties and are not applicable to a

11 | P a g e
 case where there is not and could not have been any contract at all. It has also been
observed in many cases that the court may, on adjudging the cancellation of an instrument
at the instance of a minor, require the minor to make compensation to the other party to
the instrument.

3. A minor cannot ratify an agreement on attaining majority: Ratification means

consenting to a past contract entered into during minority at a future date on attaining
majority. A minor’s contract being nullity and void ab initio has no existence in the eye of
law. Therefore, a minor on attaining majority cannot ratify a contract entered into while
he was a minor. The reason is that a void contract cannot be validated by any subsequent
action and a minor’s contract is void ab initio.

4. Minor’s liability for necessaries supplied to him or to anyone whom the minor is
bound to support: The case of necessaries supplied to a minor is covered by Section 68
of the Contract Act which provides as follows-‘If a person incapable of entering into a
contract, or anyone whom he is legally bound to support, is supplied by another person
with necessaries suited to his condition in life, the person who has furnished such supplies
is entitled to be reimbursed from property of such incapable person.’ The minor’s
property is liable for the payment of a reasonable price and not the price for necessaries
supplied to the minor or to anyone whom the minor is bound to support. What is a
necessary article is to be determined from the status and the social position of the minor.

5. The Rule of Estoppel does not apply to a minor: Section 115 of the Indian Evidence
Act explains that-‘The principle of estoppel is a rule of evidence. When a man has, by
words spoken or written or by conduct, induced another to believe that a certain state of
things exists, he will not be allowed to deny the existence of that state of things.’ Lord
Halsbury has written that-‘Estoppel arises when you are precluded from denying the truth
of anything which you have represented as a fact, although it is not a fact.’ In India it has
been held that the court can direct the minor to pay compensation to the other party in
cases where an infant obtains a loan by falsely representing his age he cannot be made to

12 | P a g e
 pay the amount of the loan as damages for fraud, nor can be compelled in equity to repay
the money.

6. Specific Performance Order by Court will never be issued to a minor: As we are

aware that an agreement by as minor is absolutely void, the court will never direct
specific performance of such a contract by a minor. But a contract entered into, on behalf
of a minor, by his guardian or by the manager of his estate will be binding on the minor
and can be specifically enforced by or against the minor provide-

(i) The contract is within the authority of the guardian or manager;

(ii) It is for the benefit of the minor.

7. Minor as a Partner: Law says that -‘A minor being incompetent to enter into contract
cannot be a partner in a partnership firm; but under Section 30 of the Indian Partnership
Act 1932, he can be admitted to the benefits of partnership with the consent of all the
partners by an agreement executed through his lawful guardian with the other partners.’
Such a partner will have a right to receive share of the property or profits of the firm and
can have an access to and inspect the books of account of the firm. The minor cannot
participate in the management of the business and can bear losses of the firm only up to
the extent of the capital contribution in the firm. He cannot be made personally liable for
any obligations of the firm, although he may after attaining majority accept those
obligations if he thinks fit to do so.

8. Minor as an Agent: A minor can be appointed as an agent (Sec 184). He can draw,
make, indorse and deliver negotiable instruments so as to bind all parties except himself.
In other words, it can be said that a minor can bind the principal by his acts done in the
course of the agency, but he cannot be held personally liable for negligence or breach of
duty.

13 | P a g e
9. Minor and the insolvency: A minor cannot be adjudicated as an insolvent as he is
incapable of entering into contracting debts. Even for the necessaries supplied to him, he
is not personally liable, only if his property is liable (Sec 68).

10. Contract by a minor and a major jointly: Where a minor and a major jointly enter into
a contract with another person the minor has no liability but the contract as a whole can
be enforced against the major.

11. Surety for a minor: A contract by s minor is void, but a contract by a guardian on his
behalf is valid. Where a guardian enters into a contract in respect of his property on
behalf of the minor, it is valid, provided it is for his benefit or for legal necessity.

12. Position of minor’s guardian: A contract entered into by the guardian of a minor on his
behalf stands on a different footing from a contract entered into by a minor himself. A
contract by a minor is void but a contract by a guardian on his behalf is valid provided the
obligations undertaken are within the powers of the guardian. A contract made by the
guardian is binding on the minor if it is for the benefit of the minor or is for legal
necessity.

13. Minor as shareholder: According to Contract Act, a minor being incompetent to

contract cannot be a shareholder of the company. Therefore a company can refuse to
register, transfer or transmission of shares in favour of a minor unless the shares are fully
paid. A minor acting through his lawful guardian may become a shareholder of the
company, in case of transfer or transmission of fully paid shares to him.

14. Minor’s Position and Liability in Tort: Tort is a civil wrong. So, minor’s position in
civil wrong is that- ‘A minor is liable for his tort, i.e. a civil wrong unless the tort is in
reality a breach of contract.’

14 | P a g e
15. Minor’s marriage: Minor’s contracted by their parents and guardians is valid. It is valid
on the ground of the custom of the community.

16. Relinquishment by a minor: A release by a minor of his rights in a property is

absolutely in fructuous in law.

17. Service contracts:

(i) A contract for personal service by a minor is void under the Indian law and the mere
fact it is for his benefit would not entitle the minor to sue under the contact.

(ii) A minor may bind himself by a contract of apprenticeship if it be for his benefit but
he cannot be used for failing to serve as such.

(iii)Contract with minor does not create legal contractual relationship between the parties.
Minor girls entering into a contract of service a person can leave the service at any
time without committing any actionable wrong.

18. Minor’s Parents:

The parents of a minor cannot be held liable for any contract that a minor enters into.
However, they can be held liable in case the minor is acting as their agent.

15 | P a g e
 3. COMPENSATIONS UNDER SECTION 64, 65 AND 70

Sec 64- Consequences of rescission of a voidable contract.—When a person at whose option

a contract is voidable rescinds it, the other party thereto need not perform any promise therein
contained in which he is the promisor. The party rescinding a voidable contract shall, if he
had received any benefit thereunder from another party to such contract, restore such benefit,
so far as may be, to the person from whom it was received.

Sec 65- Obligation of person who has received advantage under void agreement, or contract
that becomes void.—When an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract
becomes void, any person who has received any advantage under such agreement or contract
is bound to restore it, or to make compensation for it to the person from whom he received it.
—When an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void, any person
who has received any advantage under such agreement or contract is bound to restore it, or to
make compensation for it to the person from whom he received it." Illustrations

(a) A pays B 1,000 rupees, in consideration of B’s promising to marry C, A’s daughter. C is
dead at the time of the promise. The agreement is void, but B must repay A the 1,000 rupees.

(b) A contracts with B to deliver to him 250 maunds of rice before the first of May. A
delivers 130 maunds only before that day, and none after. B retains the 130 maunds after the
first of May. He is bound to pay A for them.

(c) A, a singer, contracts with B, the manager of a theatre, to sing at his theatre for two nights
in every week during the next two months, and B engages to pay her a hundred rupees for
each night’s performance. On the sixth night, A wilfully absents herself from the theatre, and
B, in consequence, rescinds the contract. B must pay A for the five nights on which she had
sung.

(d) A contracts to sing for B at a concert for 1,000 rupees, which are paid in advance. A is too
ill to sing. A is not bound to make compensation to B for the loss of the profits which B
would have made if A had been able to sing, but must refund to B the 1,000 rupees paid in
advance.

16 | P a g e
Sec 70- Obligation of person enjoying benefit of non-gratuitous act.—Where a person
lawfully does anything for another person, or delivers anything to him, not intending to do so
gratuitously, and such other person enjoys the benefit thereof, the latter is bound to make
compensation to the former in respect of, or to restore, the thing so done or delivered.1 —
Where a person lawfully does anything for another person, or delivers anything to him, not
intending to do so gratuitously, and such other person enjoys the benefit thereof, the latter is
bound to make compensation to the former in respect of, or to restore, the thing so done or
delivered.1"

Illustrations;
(a) A, a tradesman, leaves goods at B’s house by mistake. B treats the goods as his own. He is
bound to pay A for them.
(b) A saves B’s property from fire. A is not entitled to compensation from B, if the
circumstances show that he intended to act gratuitously.

4. MINOR LIABILTY FOR NECESSARIES

It has already been noted that a minor’s agreement is void ab initio, and he is incapable of
making an agreement to pay for any services rendered or goods supplied to him. However,
for the necessaries supplied to a minor reimbursement is permitted to the person supplying
such necessaries. This is not on the basis of any contract between the parties but because it is
deemed to be quasi-contractual obligation. Chapter V of the Indian Contract Act recognises
Certain Relations Resembling Those Created by Contract´, i.e. Quasi-contractual relations.
Section68 in that chapter makes a provision for the reimbursement for the necessaries
supplied to a minor.

The provision is as under:

If a person, incapable of entering into a contract, or any one whom he is legally bound to
support, is supplied by another person with necessaries suited to his condition in life, the

17 | P a g e
person who has furnished such supplies is entitled to be reimbursed from the property of such
incapable person.

This section permits reimbursement if:

1. Necessaries are supplied,

2. to a person who is incapable of making a contract, i.e. a minor or a lunatic.

3. to a person who is dependent upon such person incapable of making a contract.

4. For re-imbursement no personal action can lie against the minor etc., but reimbursement is
permitted from the property of such incapable person.

Illustrations

(a) A supplies B, a lunatic, with necessaries suitable to his condition in life. A is entitled to be
reimbursed from B property.

(b) A supplied the wife and children of B, a lunatic, with necessaries to their condition in life.
A is entitled to be reimbursed from B’s property.

5. WHAT ARE NECESSARIES?

According to Section 68 the necessaries supplied to a minor should be suited to his condition
in life. It does not mean bare necessities of life, but such things which may be necessary to
maintain a person according to his condition in life.

What are necessaries may depend upon the status of a person , and also his requirement at the
time of actual delivery of the goods. In Jagon Ram Vs. Mahadeo Prasad Sahu It was observed
Necessaries means goods suitable to the condition in life of the dependent and to his actual
requirements at the time of the sale and delivery, and whether an article supplied to an infant

18 | P a g e
is necessary or not, depends upon its general character and upon its suitability to the
particular infant’s station in life. It must further be observed that as ³necessaries´ include
everything necessary to maintain the infant in the state, station, or degree of life in which he
is, what is necessary is a relative fact, to be determined with reference to the fortune and
circumstances of the particular infant ; articles therefore that to one person might be mere
convenience or matters of taste, may in the case of another be considered necessaries, where
the usages of society render them proper for a person in the rank of life in which the infant
moves.

In Clyde Cycle Co. vs. Hargreaves (1898), it has been held that a racing cycle is a necessary
for an infant apprentice. Similarly, In Chapple vs. Cooper (1844) it was held that an infant
widow is bound by a contract for the burial of her husband as the contract is for a necessary.

In Nash vs. Inman (1908) a minor, who was already having sufficient supply of clothing
suitable to his position, was supplied further clothing by a tailor. It was held that the price of
the clothes so supplied could not be recovered.

In Ryder vs. Womb well, the defendant, an infant, having an income of only 500 Pounds per
year was supplied a pair of crystal, ruby and diamond solitaries and an antique silver goblet.
It was held that these things could not be considered to be necessaries. It was observed that
certain things like ear rings for a male, spectacles for a blind person, or a wild animal, cannot
be considered as necessaries.

In Kunwarlal Vs. Surajmal (1963) It was held that the house given to a minor on rent for
living and continuing his studies is deemed to be supply of necessaries suited to the minor’s
conditions of life, and the rent for the house can be recovered.

6. CASES RELATED

CASE I: Subrahmanyam's case. 75 Ind App 115 = (AIR 1948 PC 95) 1948

A had executed promissory notes in the sum of Rs. 16,000 in favour of B. He had also
mortgaged certain property to a third party in the sum of Rs. 1,200. A died on 4-10-1935. His
widow entered into an agreement dated 29-11-1935 on behalf of her minor son to transfer the

19 | P a g e
mortgaged property to B for a consideration of Rs. 17,000. Out of this amount, B was to
utilize Rupees 1,200 in redeeming the mortgage and rest of the amount towards satisfaction
of his own debt under the promissory notes. A suit was filed on behalf of the minor for
possession of the property on the ground that the agreement entered into by his mother was
not binding on him. The defence was that B was protected under Section 53A of the Transfer
of Property Act. The trial Court held that as A and his son, the minor, were members of a
joint Hindu family, the minor was bound to satisfy the debt. His guardian could have,
therefore, validly transferred the property, as the transfer would have been for the benefit of
the minor. Even though no sale-deed was executed in favour of B, he was entitled to
protection under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. This decision was reversed by
the first appellate Court and was confirmed by the High Court.

The guardian of the Hindu minor was, called upon to decide as to whether the expression 'the
transferor' would include a minor on whose behalf the agreement had been entered into by the
guardian. If the transfer would have been affected, the transfer would have been of the
minor's property, and not of his mother, and hence there was no reason why the minor should
not be treated as a transferor.

The High Court was of the view that the observations of the guardians are not applicable to
all contracts entered into on behalf of the minor. We have already pointed out that the
guardian of a Hindu minor could validly transfer his property if it was for legal necessity or
benefit of the estate of the minor; but he had no authority to purchase any property.

Solution:

A contract by a guardian on his behalf is valid provided the obligations undertaken are within
the powers of the guardian. A contract made by the guardian is binding on the minor if it is
for the benefit of the minor or is for legal necessity. Here the agreement entered into by the
mother of minors is not binding on the minor as the agreement is not for their benefit. Minor
are not bound to satisfy the debt taken by their guardian. The transfer of the said property to
B is not for the benefit of the estate of the minor, thus null & void

20 | P a g e
CASE II: Suresh Chandra Pradhan vs Ganesh Chandra De And Ors. on 2/9/1949

Defendants 1 & 2 are minors & the suit-contract is one entered into on their behalf by their
mother as guardian. The contract was for sailing the property for a sum of Rs. 75 out of
which Rs. 35 was paid as advance & the balance was to be paid later. Defendant 3 who is the
sister's husband of defendants l & 2 has purchased the suit property on 3-2-1943 subsequent
to the agreement in favour of the plaintiffs. The genuineness of the consideration alleged to
have been paid thereunder were denied by the defendants & contested in the courts below. It
has been found by the trial Court that the agreement was true & that a sum of Rs. 35 was paid
as an advance under it. It was also found that the agreement was executed in order to raise
money to repay a decretal debt for Rs. 60 against the minors in respect of which there was an
execution pending at the time. It was further found that defendant 3 was fully aware of the
agreement & took the sale deed in his favour with notice of the same. The argument that has
been advanced on behalf of the defendants is that no specific performance can be decreed
against the minors on the basis of a contract entered into on their behalf by their guardian
even though it may be for legal necessity or for the benefit of the minor. This contention has
been accepted by both the Courts below & the suit has been accordingly dismissed.

It has been taken as settled law that a mere executory contract entered into by a guardian on
behalf of a minor imposing a personal obligation on the minor's estate is not valid & binding
& it makes no difference that it is for necessity or benefit.

Solution:

A contract by a minor is void but a contract by a guardian on his behalf is valid provided the
obligations undertaken are within the powers of the guardian. A contract made by the
guardian is binding on the minor if it is for the benefit of the minor or is for legal necessity.
Here the contract entered into on their behalf by their guardian is for legal necessity but no
specific performance can be decreed against the minors because Minor’s liability is only for
the necessaries supplied to him.

21 | P a g e
 7. CONCLUSION

The Contract Act, 1872 has provisions that are made with the intention to favor one of the
contracting parties so that the other party cannot take benefit of that party. Certain categories
of people are presumed to be not aware of their decisions and are incapable of properly
weighing the consequences. It is the duty of the legislature that the laws made, should protect
the rights of the people who have a weaker position and can be manipulated by the people
with whom they enter into a contract.

Hence the Indian Contract Act, 1872 has laid down different provisions and sections in
favour of the minor, a person under a certain age, usually the age of majority, which legally
demarcates childhood from adulthood. The age of majority depends upon jurisdiction and
application, but it is generally 18. As it has been predefined in Indian Contract law that any
contract with a minor is void ab initio. Still to brief such provisions certain sections have
been laid down.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

The researcher has consulted following sources to complete the rough proposal:

BOOKS:

Bangia, D. R. (2017). CONTRACT 1. Allahabad Law Agency.

Singh, A. (2017). Law of Contract & Specific Relief. Eastern Book Company.

WEBSITES:

a. https://www.shsu.edu/klett/CONTRACTUAL%20CAPACITY%20ch%2013%20BL.htm

b. https://www.owlgen.com/question/explain-why-a-minors-estate-is-liable-for-necessaries-
supplied

22 | P a g e