Mr. A, the employer induced his employee Mr. B to sell his one room flat to him at less than the market value to secure promotion. Mr. B sold the…
CA Foundation · Business Laws · MTP · June 2024
Mr. A, the employer induced his employee Mr. B to sell his one room flat to him at less than the market value to secure promotion. Mr. B sold the flat to Mr. A. Later on, Mr. B changed his mind and decided to sue Mr. A. Examine the validity of the contract as per the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Suggested Answer and Working Notes:
The business was carried on by all or any of them acting for all. On the basis of above provisions and facts provided in the question, Mr. Ram and Mr. Raheem cannot be said under partnership as they are teachers in a school and just purchased a flat jointly. By merely giving the flat on rent, they are not doing business. They are just earning the income from the property under their co-ownership. Hence, there is no partnership between them. Therefore, Mr. Ram is liable to pay his share only i.e.1500. Mr. John has to claim the rest of 1500from Mr. Raheem.
Topics: The Indian Contract Act, 1872
Related Questions in this Topic
- Some objects and consideration are unlawful. Define any six with reference to provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 187...
- In light of provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 answer the following: (i) Mr. S and Mr. R made contract wherein...
- Mr. Sohan, a wealthy individual provided a loan of ₹ 80,000 to Mr. Mukesh on 26th February, 2025. The borrower, Mr. Muke...
- (i) Mr. L let out his residential house to Mr. M for ₹ 50,000 p.m. for a period of one year. According to the Rent agree...
- Preeti, a minor, falsely representing her age, enters into an agreement with an authorised Laptop dealer Mr. Mittal, own...