Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
The consideration which passed -under the earlier contract cannot be implied into the
contract into which the minor enters on attaining majority (Nazir Ahmed vs Jiwan Dass).
Since ratification relates back to the date when the contract was originally made, it is
necessary for a valid ratification that the person who purports to ratify must be
competent to contract at the time of the contract.
4. The rule of estoppel does not apply to a minor:
In the words of Lord Halsbury: 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.
The rule of estoppel does not apply to a minor, i.e., a minor is not estopped from
pleading his infancy in order to avoid a contract, even if he has entered into an
agreement by falsely representing that he was of full age (Sadiq Ali Khan vs Jai
Kishore).
In other words, where an infant represents fraudulently or otherwise that he is of full age
and thereby induces another to enter into a contract with him, then in an action founded
on the contract; the infant is not estopped from setting up infancy.
But if any thing is traceable in the hands of minor, out of the proceeds of the contract
made by fraudulently representing that he was of full age, the court may direct the minor
to restore that thing to the other party, on equitable considerations, for minors can have
no privilege to cheat man (Khan Gul vs Lakha Singh).
Thus, if a minor obtains a loan by fraudulent representation and purchases a motorcar
out of that, although the loan transaction is invalid, the court may direct the minor to
restore the motorcar to the lender.
But once the identity of the property or money has been lost because it has been spent
wastefully, it is no longer possible to invoke the aid of the equitable doctrine of
restitution. Again, it may be noted that restoration is allowed only when a minor
commits fraud by misrepresenting his age because Section 65 expressly prohibits
restoration in cases which are known to be void.
But a contract entered into, on behalf of a minor, by his guardian or by the manager of
his estate, is binding on the minor and can be specifically enforced by or against the
minor, provided: (a) the contract is within the authority of the guardian or manager; and
(b) it is for the benefit of the minor.
Thus it was held in Gujoba Tulsiram vs Nilkanth, that a contract of sale of immovable
property by the guardian of minor, for the minor benefit, may be specifically enforced by
either party to the contract.
7. Minor partner:
A minor being incompetent to contract cannot be a partner in a partnership firm, but
under Section 30 of the Indian Partnership Act, 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 minor will have a right to such share of the property or profits of the firm as may
be agreed upon and he would have access to and inspect and copy any of the accounts
of the firm.
The minor cannot participate in the management of the business and shall not share
losses except when liability to third parties has arisen but then too upto his share in the
partnership assets. 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 agent:
A minor can be an agent (Sec. 184). He shall bind the principal by his acts done in the
course of such an agency, but he cannot be held personally liable for negligence or
breach of duty. Thus in appointing a minor as an agent, the principal runs a great risk.
9. Minor and insolvency:
It follows from it that 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. Logically also, if a minor could legally hold property in his name, it would be wrong
to debar him from holding fully paid up shares in his own name.
14. Minors liability in tort:
A tort is a civil wrong (not having its genesis in contractual or equitable relationship) for
which the ordinary remedy is damages. A minor is liable for his tort, unless the tort is in
reality a breach of contract. Thus, where a minor hired a horse for riding and injured it
by overriding, he was not held liable (Jennings vs Rundall).