Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 102 views

    Chinnaya Vs Ramayya

    Uploaded by

    santhosh Mohankumar
    1) A lady gifted land to her daughter through a registered gift deed that required the daughter to pay her sister Rs. 653 annually. 2) After the mother died, the daughter refused to pay her sister. The sister then sued the daughter to recover the promised payments. 3) The court held that although the sister was not party to the original contract, the consideration was provided on her behalf by their mother. Therefore, the sister could enforce the daughter's promise under Indian contract law. The sister was entitled to recover the annual payments from the daughter.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Chinnaya Vs Ramayya

    Uploaded by

    santhosh Mohankumar
    102 views7 pages
    1) A lady gifted land to her daughter through a registered gift deed that required the daughter to pay her sister Rs. 653 annually. 2) After the mother died, the daughter refused to pay her sister. The sister then sued the daughter to recover the promised payments. 3) The court held that although the sister was not party to the original contract, the consideration was provided on her behalf by their mother. Therefore, the sister could enforce the daughter's promise under Indian contract law. The sister was entitled to recover the annual payments from the daughter.

    Original Description:

    chinnaya vs ramayya case

    Original Title

    chinnaya vs ramayya

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) A lady gifted land to her daughter through a registered gift deed that required the daughter to pay her sister Rs. 653 annually. 2) After the mother died, the daughter refused to pay her sister. The sister then sued the daughter to recover the promised payments. 3) The court held that although the sister was not party to the original contract, the consideration was provided on her behalf by their mother. Therefore, the sister could enforce the daughter's promise under Indian contract law. The sister was entitled to recover the annual payments from the daughter.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    102 views7 pages

    Chinnaya Vs Ramayya

    Uploaded by

    santhosh Mohankumar
    1) A lady gifted land to her daughter through a registered gift deed that required the daughter to pay her sister Rs. 653 annually. 2) After the mother died, the daughter refused to pay her sister. The sister then sued the daughter to recover the promised payments. 3) The court held that although the sister was not party to the original contract, the consideration was provided on her behalf by their mother. Therefore, the sister could enforce the daughter's promise under Indian contract law. The sister was entitled to recover the annual payments from the daughter.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 7

    C H I NNAY A

    VS
    R AMAYY A

    ILR (1876-82) 4 MAD 137


    CASE SUMMARY
    COURT : MADRAS HIGH COURT
    FULL CASE NAME : CHINNAYA V. RAMMAYA (1882)
    DATE DECIDED : 21ST OCTOBER 1987
    CITATIONS : ILR (1876-82) 4 MAD 137
    JUDGES : INNES J, KINDERSLEY J
    APPELLANT : VENKATA CHINNAYA
    RESPONDENT : VENKATA RAMAYYAGARU
    CASE
    A lady granted/ gifted a property consisting of
    some land to her daughter (defendant) by a gift
    deed. The deed was registered to the proper
    authorities. One of the terms of the deed was that
    the daughter had to pay a sum of Rs.653 annually.
    Later the old lady died, and the defendant refused
    to pay the money the sister whom she had promised to
    pay so. And hence the plaintiff sued the defendant
    for the recovery of the same.
    Appellants Respondents
    1. Issue: 2. 3.
    argument argument

    Whether the plaintiff The consideration The plaintiff was


    can bring an action for getting the not a party to
    against the defendant property was a contract, hence
    for the amount promise to pay the was had no right
    promised in a amount annually to to compel
    contract where the the plaintiff. respondent for
    consideration for paying the
    such promise has been promised amount.
    furnished by the
    mother of the
    defendant
    (plaintiff’s sister)?
    JUDGEMENT
    The Madras High Court held that in this agreement between the defendant
    and plaintiff the consideration has been furnished on behalf of the
    plaintiff (sister) by her own sister (respondents mother). Although the
    plaintiff was stranger to the consideration but since he was a party to
    the contract he could enforce the promise to the promisor, since under
    law, Consideration may be given by the promise or anyone on her behalf –
    vide section 2(D) of Indian Contract Act,1872.

    Thus, consideration furnished by the old lady constitutes sufficient


    consideration for the plaintiff to sue the defendant on her promise.

    Held, The sister was entitled to a decree for payment of the annual sum
    of money.
    CONCLUSION

    In Indian Law, consideration may be given by the promise or any


    other person. In India, there is a possibility that consideration
    for the promise may move not from the promise but a third person,
    who is not a party to the contract, different from the English Law
    in which the consideration must move from only the promise.

    You might also like