Mobile View
Main Search Advanced Search Disclaimer
Citedby 65 docs - [View All]
Adiraja Ariga And Ors. vs K. Beeranna Rai on 1 March, 1956
Suresh Kumar Joon vs Mool Chand Motors & Ors. on 22 August, 2012
Adiraja Ariga And Ors. vs K. Beeranna Rai on 1 March, 1956
Debi Prasad vs Bhagwati Prasad And Anr. on 15 October, 1942
Tulsi Ram vs Same Singh on 13 November, 1980

[Section 25] [Complete Act]
Central Government Act
Section 25(3) in The Indian Contract Act, 1872
(3) It is a promise, made in writing and signed by the person to be charged therewith, or by his agent generally or specially authorized in that behalf, to pay wholly or in part a debt of which the creditor might have enforced payment but for the law for the limitation of suits. tc" (3) It is a promise, made in writing and signed by the person to be charged therewith, or by his agent generally or specially authorized in that behalf, to pay wholly or in part a debt of which the creditor might have enforced payment but for the law for the limitation of suits." In any of these cases, such an agreement is a contract. tc "In any of these cases, such an agreement is a contract." Explanation 1.—Nothing in this section shall affect the validity, as between the donor and donee, of any gift actually made. tc "Explanation 1.—Nothing in this section shall affect the validity, as between the donor and donee, of any gift actually made." Explanation 2.—An Agreement to which the consent of the promisor is freely given is not void merely because the consideration is inadequate; but the inadequacy of the consideration may be taken into account by the Court in determining the question whether the consent of the promisor was freely given. tc "Explanation 2.—An Agreement to which the consent of the promisor is freely given is not void merely because the consideration is inadequate; but the inadequacy of the consideration may be taken into account by the Court in determining the question whether the consent of the promisor was freely given." Illustrations
(a) A promises, for no consideration, to give to B Rs. 1,000. This is a void agreement. tc "(a) A promises, for no consideration, to give to B Rs. 1,000. This is a void agreement."
(b) A, for natural love and affection, promises to give his son, B, Rs. 1,000. A puts his promise to B into writing and registers it. This is a contract. tc "(b) A, for natural love and affection, promises to give his son, B, Rs. 1,000. A puts his promise to B into writing and registers it. This is a contract."
(c) A finds B’s purse and gives it to him. B promises to give A Rs. 50. This is a contract. tc "(c) A finds B’s purse and gives it to him. B promises to give A Rs. 50. This is a contract."
(d) A supports B’s infant son. B promises to pay A’s expenses in so doing. This is a contract. tc "(d) A supports B’s infant son. B promises to pay A’s expenses in so doing. This is a contract."
(e) A owes B Rs. 1,000, but the debt is barred by the Limitation Act. A signs a written promise to pay B Rs. 500 on account of the debt. This is a contract. tc "(e) A owes B Rs. 1,000, but the debt is barred by the Limitation Act. A signs a written promise to pay B Rs. 500 on account of the debt. This is a contract."
(f) A agrees to sell a horse worth Rs. 1,000 for Rs. 10. A’s consent to the agreement was freely given. The agreement is a contract notwithstanding the inadequacy of the consideration. tc "(f) A agrees to sell a horse worth Rs. 1,000 for Rs. 10. A’s consent to the agreement was freely given. The agreement is a contract notwithstanding the inadequacy of the consideration."
(g) A agrees to sell a horse worth Rs. 1,000 for Rs. 10. A denies that his consent to the agreement was freely given. tc "(g) A agrees to sell a horse worth Rs. 1,000 for Rs. 10. A denies that his consent to the agreement was freely given." The inadequacy of the consideration is a fact which the Court should take into account in considering whether or not A’s consent was freely given.