Abdul Aziz vs. Masum Ali||Case Summary||AIR 1914 All 22||

Contracts without consideration are not enforceable

FACTS

The appellants were members of the Agra Islam Local Agency Committee. In 1907, a movement was started to raise funds for the repair of a mosque called Masjid Hamman Alawardi Khan. The local agency committee approved a subscription of Rs. 3,000 and other amounts were pledged by individuals. Treasurer Munshi Abdul Karim was given Rs. 100 in cash by Hakim Shafi Ullah and a cheque of Rs. 500 by Munshi Jan Mohammad, but the cheque was dishonoured because of some irregularities. Munshi Abdul Karim died in 1909 a,nd in 1910 a, suit was instituted against his successors for the recovery of Rs. 1000, Rs. 500 being the amount promised by him and Rs. 500 in respect of the uncashed cheque.

ISSUES

1. Whether the promise is enforceable without consideration?

2. Whether Munshi Abdul's heirs are liable to pay 1000/- for negligence?

RELEVANT LAWS

1. Section 2(d) of Indian Contract Act: Defines consideration as something of value given in exchange for a promise. A promise with no consideration is generally not enforceable.

2. Section 25 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872: Provides that an agreement without consideration is void, except in certain exceptions, like agreements made out of natural love and affection with a written and registered document.

3. Doctrine of Gratuitous Promises: A promise to bestow a voluntary gift or donation with no consideration is not generally legally enforceable, unless the promisee has relied on the promise by taking substantial actions or making commitments on the expectation that the promisor will keep their promise.

JUDGEMENT

The court ruled in Abdul Aziz vs. Masum Ali that the action could not be sustained on either point. Munshi Abdul Karim's promise was held to be gratuitous and there was no proof that he had reserved the promised amount. In the case of the uncashed cheque, it was held to be difficult to hold him liable even in his lifetime. The court in Abdul Aziz vs Masum Ali held that a promise to contribute for a charitable purpose, without taking any step to incur liability, is not enforceable. It was stressed that if liability is incurred on the promise, then it is enforceable.

Vinita Pathak