Contract Act, 1872

Understanding Elements of the Contract Act 1872 Bangladesh

Section-23

(a) The plaintiff stated in the plaint that the two kabalas executed and registered in favour of defendant No. 1 were file- gal and void as no consideration passed— the impugned kabalas were executed during the pendency of a non-compoundable criminal offence—High Court Division observe. In the absence of any evidence of force, coercion or intimidation, the provisions of section 23 of the Contract Act cannot be attracted in a case—Held : This approach of the learned Single Judge is not correct, because if for withdrawing and compromising a non-compoundable case an agreement is entered into between the parties then the same is against public policy and the bar of section 23 of the Contract Act is attracted. [Para- 10]

Moti Mia Vs. Ayesha Khatun & Anr. 4BLT (AD)-6

(b) The criminal proceeding was pending while kabalas executed and registered

— the kabalas are not hit by section 23 of the Contract Act as the plaintiff failed to

make out a specific case on the pleadings and on the evidence on record that the kabalas were executed in pursuance of an agreement to compromise a non-compoundable offence. (Para- 151 Mod Mia Vs. Ayesha Khatun & Anr 4BLT AD-6

Section-23

The suit land being the property of the Government the Railway Administration could not make any contract with respect to the same as this will plainly offend Section 23 of the Contract Act. [Para- 12]

Bangladesh Railway & Ors. Vs. P. K. Chakraborty 5 BLT (AD)-153

Section-28

Section 28 of the Contract Act makes void only those agreements which absolutely restrict a party to a contract from enforcing the rights under that contract in ordinary tribunals. But this section has no application when a party agrees not to restrict his right of enforcing his rights in the ordinary tribunals but only agrees to a selection of one of those ordinary tribunals in which ordinarily a suit would be tried. [Para-53]

Bangladesh Air Service (Put.) Ltd. Vs. British Airways PLC. 5 BLT (AD)-242

Section-31

Plaintiff tenants under defendant No. 1 landlord having paid two installments one of three installments as advance as per a tenancy agreement for shop rooms of a multi- storied building under construction and tender of 3rd installment being disputed, the plaintiff instituted the suit seeking various reliefs. 50% of the advance being paid the landlord cannot do injustice to the existing tenant contract for construction though contingent the suit decreed justifiably.

Since the plaintiffs were the existing tenants having payment of regular rents and since 50% of the advance was paid in due time as per agreement, equity demands that the landlord-defendant No. 1 cannot do injustice to his existing tenants who were craning their livelihood from respective

shops. Though the contract for construction was a contingent and this plaintiffs suit was rightfully decreed specially when the multi- storied building was factually completed. [Paras- 5 & 6]

Shamsuddin Ahmed Vs. S. M. Harun-Or-Rashid 1 BLT (AD)-48

Section-73

Section- 73 provides for compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract. It provides further that such compensation is not to be given for any remote and indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach. [Para- 12]

Sonali Bank Vs. M/S Kamaphuli Works Ltd. 2BLT (AD)-78

In consideration of both Section-61(2) of sale of goods Act and Section-73 of contract, it is held that the principal sum due to the plaintiff having been a definite one and payable within a definite time as provided in the agreement, the order for its payment along with interest thereon is quite lawful. [Para- 13]

Sonali Bank Vs. M/S Kamaphuli Works Ltd. 2 BLT (AD)-78

Disclaimer:

The information contains in this web-site is prepared for educational purpose. This site may be used by the students, faculties, independent learners and the learned advocates of all over the world. Researchers all over the world have the access to upload their writes up in this site. In consideration of the people’s participation in the Web Page, the individual, group, organization, business, spectator, or other, does hereby release and forever discharge the Lawyers & Jurists, and its officers, board, and employees, jointly and severally from any and all actions, causes of actions, claims and demands for, upon or by reason of any damage, loss or injury, which hereafter may be sustained by participating their work in the Web Page. This release extends and applies to, and also covers and includes, all unknown, unforeseen, unanticipated and unsuspected injuries, damages, loss and liability and the consequences thereof, as well as those now disclosed and known to exist.  The provisions of any state’s law providing substance that releases shall not extend to claims, demands, injuries, or damages which are known or unsuspected to exist at this time, to the person executing such release, are hereby expressly waived. However the Lawyers & Jurists makes no warranty expressed or implied or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product process or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favouring by the Lawyers & Jurists. The views and opinions of the authors expressed in the Web site do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Lawyers & Jurists. Above all, if there is any complaint drop by any independent user to the admin for any contents of this site, the Lawyers & Jurists would remove this immediately from its site.