Below are the rules for inclusion in a contract. Consideration may therefore be an advantage for one party or a disadvantage for the other. It can be an action, abstinence or a promise. A agrees to sell his house to B for 5,00,000 rupees. Here is B`s promise to pay the sum of Rs. 5,00,000, the counterpart of A`s promise to sell the house, and A`s promise to sell the house is the counterpart of B`s promise to pay Rs. 5,00,000. Under section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act of 1872, consideration is defined as follows: It began with the requirement that the transfer of ownership required the deeds of an offer and acceptance. Although the original contract was concluded under the word of honor, this quickly became a problem as there was no further evidence that the actual agreement existed. This has created the need for written contracts, which are essentially a written offer and conditions of acceptance. A party that is already legally required to provide money, object, service or forbearance will not take into account if it simply promises to comply with this obligation. [32] [33] [34] This legal obligation may arise from the law or from an obligation under a previous contract.
The consideration must be real and not illusory or impossible: the consideration must be real and not illusory. Real contemplation is contemplation that is not physically or legally impossible. Illusory means that it can give the impression of a consideration that is not really there. Considerations can be classified as past, present, and future. Past considerations are something that was entirely done or worn or suffered before the conclusion of the agreement. Peter gave his son Oliver an apartment in the city on the condition that he pay a fixed sum of money to his uncle John each year. On the same day, Oliver signed a certificate to pay John a fixed amount of money each year. However, Oliver did not pay and John filed a lawsuit for the recovery. Oliver pleaded that he was not responsible because there had been no return of John. However, the court recorded the words “promised or any other person” and allowed John to grant his claim for recovery. Example: A gave B a discount and asked him to make an annual payment to A.B`s brother, by an agreement reached on the same day with A`s brother, promised to carry out A`s instructions. Later, B refused to make the payment to A`s brother on the grounds that there was no consideration for A`s brother.
The court decided that B`s promise to A`s brother was sufficiently taken into consideration, as the consideration in India does not have to be moved by the promettant, but can come from any other person. Example: If A promises to sell a house worth INR. 500,000 for inR. Only 50,000, the insufficiency of the price itself does not invalidate the transaction. However, if a party invokes coercion, undue influence or fraud, insufficient consideration is also evidence that must be investigated. If the promising is already obliged by his promise or law to perform or refrain from a certain action, then this is not a good consideration for a promise. Consideration is the basis on which each contract is built. The law would only enforce the promises made in return. Valid goodwill must involve each party, which means that each person involved in the contract must promise to do something and also promise not to do something.
Without consideration, a promise has no legal obligation. Let`s break down each part of the definition of consideration in the law: depending on the legal consideration, if the promisor has no objections, the consideration can be transferred to a third party. For example, A can grant a rented house to B and ask B to pay for it to X. If B refuses to pay it to X, the case could go to court and force B to pay X because there is enough consideration for A to make the payment to X. Suppose B commits an offense against A that causes $5,000 in damages and $3,000 in punitive damages. Since there is no guarantee that A would win against B if he went to court, A can agree to drop the case if B pays the $5,000 in damages. This is sufficient consideration because B`s consideration is a secured recovery and A assumes that B only has to pay $5,000 instead of $8,000. Consideration can be seen as the concept of value offered and accepted by the individuals or organizations that enter into contracts. Anything of value that one party promises to the other when entering into a contract can be treated as “consideration”: for example, if A signs a contract to buy a car from B for $5,000, A`s consideration is $5,000 and B`s consideration is the car. The doctrine of consideration requires that any contract be supported by some form of consideration. However, a partial payment of the debt does not represent a good counterpart to the contract. The doctrine of consideration arose from the fact that plaintiffs in court proceedings were not allowed to make claims for presumption in court solely because the defendant had promised to do something.
Therefore, something had to be created so that the plaintiff could have proof of his claim and could claim damages. If the consideration for a promise is postponed after the conclusion of the contract, it is a future or an executor. It is also valid if it depends on a condition. Each contract must be supported by a counterparty: no valid contract can be born without consideration. According to Salmond, a promise without consideration is a gift; a deal that is made with consideration is a good deal. With the exception of certain exceptions in section 25 of the Indian Contracts Act, the rule, no consideration, no contract applies. Current Consideration – If one of the Parties has fulfilled its share of the promise that constitutes the consideration to be provided by the other Party, this is referred to as the Current Counterparty. Let`s say A has lost his watch and offers to pay Rs 300 to the person who finds it.
If B finds the watch and gives it to A, then A is obliged to pay Rs 300 to B as part of this consideration. Peter`s wife agrees to withdraw the lawsuit she filed against him in exchange for her promise to pay him monthly alimony. That is a good consideration and it has value in the eyes of the law. The performance of a legal contract requires that a consideration element be included. Simply put, it is nothing more than a price that the promiser is willing to pay to the promising. Now, this price can be paid as an advantage for the promisor and/or as a loss or inconvenience for the promisor. In this article, we will examine in detail this dual aspect of consideration. If A signs a contract with B so that A cancels B`s house for $500, A`s consideration is the service of painting B`s house, and B`s consideration is $500 paid to A. If A signs a contract with B so that A does not repaint his own house in a color other than white and B A pays $500 a year to maintain that agreement, there is also a consideration.
Although A did not promise to do anything in the affirmative, A promised not to do something he was allowed to do, and so A was considered. The consideration of A for B is the tolerance of painting one`s own house in a color other than white, and the consideration of B for A is $500 per year. Conversely, if A signs a contract to buy a car from B for $0, B is still the car, but A does not give any attention, and so there is no valid contract. However, if B still gives ownership of the car to A, B cannot take back the car because, although it is not a valid contract, it is a valid gift. In Currie v. Misa [1], the court stated that consideration was a “right, interest, profit, advantage or abstention, disadvantage, loss, liability”. Therefore, the consideration is a promise of something of value given by a donor in exchange for something of value given by a promisor; And generally, the question of value is a good, money or a stock. Act with indulgence, . B as an adult who promises to quit smoking, is only enforceable if you thus waive a legal right. [2] [3] [4] An agreement entered into without consideration is void unless it is a promise to indemnify in whole or in part a person who has already voluntarily done something for the promise or something to which the promising person was legally bound; or unless. Systems based on Roman law (including Germany [22] and Scotland) do not need to be taken into consideration, and some commentators consider them useless and have proposed abandoning the doctrine of quid pro quo[23] and replacing it as the basis of treaties. [24] However, legislation, not judicial development, has been presented as the only way to eliminate this deep-rooted common law doctrine .
. . .