Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 13

172. Section 231-232.-

Sections 231 and 232 overlap. Marriot, J., in the case of Premji Trikamdas v. Madhowji Munji, 4 Bom 447, took the view that section 232 was not a repetition of the first part of section 231 and that it was a qualification of the first portion of paragraph 1 of section 231, which gives a principal a general right to enforce a contract entered into by his agent. According to the learned Judge, section 232 qualifies that general right by making it subject to the rights and obligations subsisting between the agent and the other contracting party. Pollock and Mulla1 express their inability to discover any difference between the first paragraph of section 231 and section 232. According to them the case is one of inadverence. We agree with the learned commentators, and recommend that section 232, being covered by the provision in section 231, be omitted.

1. Pollock & Mull; Op. Cit., p. 708.

Indian Contract Act, 1872 Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
The information provided on is solely available at your request for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertisement.
Powered and driven by Neosys Inc