9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

COMPULSORY MOOT 9TH SEMESTER

UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES

PANJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH

BEFORE THE HON’BLE DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURTS TIS HAZARI

DELHI

IN THE MATTER OF

GURDAYAL SINGH…………………………………………………………..PLAINTIFF

V.

MINOR…………………………………………………………………………DEFENDANT

(UNDER SECTION 9 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908)

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFF

SUBMITTED BY:

GUNJAN GARG

ROLL NO. 312/19, 17788

B.COM LL.B (H)

SEMESTER 9TH

SECTION F

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 0

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

TABLE OF CONTENT

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS......................................................................................................................................2

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES........................................................................................................................................3

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION...........................................................................................................................5

STATEMENT OF FACTS...........................................................................................................................................6

ISSUES RAISED...........................................................................................................................................................7

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS..................................................................................................................................8

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED.......................................................................................................................................9

1. ISSUE 1- WHETHER THERE IS A VALID CONTRACT BETWEEN MANVI AND GURDAYAL SINGH ? 9

1.1.1 Misrepresentation……………………………………………………..………………….………………9

1.1.2 Voidability on the basis of Misrepresentation………………………………………….……………….…………………….9

2. ISSUE 2- WHETHER THE PLAINTIFF IS ENTILED TO RECOVER MONEY IN THE SUIT OF

RECOVERY?.........................................................................................................................................................10

2.1.1 Established Precedents………………………………………………………………….………………10

2.1.2 The Principle of Restitution as contained in Section 33, Specific Relief Act, 1963……….………….11

2.1.2. A) Any benefit to Estate is Restorable………………………………………….………………11

2.1.3 The Principle of Restitution as contained in Section 73, Indian Contract Act, 1972………………….12

2.1.4 The Principle of Restitution as contained in Section 65, Indian Contract Act, 1972……………….……..14

3. ISSUE 3- WHETHER THE JUDGEMENT PASSED IN MOHORI BIBEE V. DHARMODAS

GHOSE NEEDS RECONSIDERATION?.........................................................................................................15

3.1.1. As per the case of Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodar Ghose…………………………………………..……15

3.1.1. A) Principle of Estoppel…………………………………………………..…………………….15

3.1.2 Law Commission Report………………….…………………………………….………………………17

3.1.2. A) Loans to Minor…………………………………………………………………………………………….…………….…….18

4. ISSUE 4- WHETHER PLAINTIFF CAN SEEK ALTERNATIVE REMDY UNDER SECTION 29

OF SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963?.................................................................................................................19

4.1.1. Per Section 29 of the New Specific Relief Act, 1963………...………………………………………..19

4.1.2 Per Section 30 of the New Specific Relief Act, 1963…………………………………………………………….…………19

PRAYER......................................................................................................................................................................20

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 1

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS EXPANSION

& And

§ Section

¶ Paragraph

AC Appeal Cases

AIR All India Reporter

Anr. Another

Art. Article

@ Alias

Del Delhi

Dt. District

Ed. Edition

FR Fundamental Right

Govt. Government

Hon’ble Honorable

Id. Ibid

ICA Indian Contract Act

M.A. Miscellaneous Application

Mad Madras

NCT National Capital Territory

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 2

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

-INDIAN CASE LAWS-

Case Laws
1. Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose (1903) ILR 30 Cal. 539 (PC)
2. Manmatha Kumar Saha v. Exchange Loan co. Ltd, 1936
3. Kundan Bibi v. Sree Narayan , Calcutta High Court
4. Leslie Ltd. v. Sheill , 1914 3 K.B. 607
5. Khan Gul & Lakha Singh, 1928
6. Varghese v. lype Kuriakose & Ors. . 1973
7. Jagar Nath Singh & Ors. v. Laltha Prasad & Ors. , 1908
8. T.R Appaswami Aiyangar v. Narayanaswami Aiyar and Ors. (1931) 60 MLJ 117
Mithoolal Nayak vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India, 1962 AIR 814, 1962 SCR Supl.
(2) 571
Derry v. Peek 1889 LR 14 Cas 337
Chikham Amiraju v Chikham Seshamma(1912) 16 IC 344 Mad
MDW Holdings Ltd v Norvill [2021] EWHC 1135 (Ch)

Gorely v. Codd [1967] 1 W.L.R. 19 ,

McKay v. Essex Area Health Authority [1982] Q.B. 1166

DICTIONARIES
1. BRYAN A. GARNER, BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY (8th eD. 2001).
2. P. RAMANATHA AIYER, THE LAW LEXICON (2ND ED. 2004).
3. OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY, (2nd ed. 2009).
4. WEBSTER'S NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY (1926)
WEBSITES
1.www.judis.nic.in.
2. www.manupatra.com

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 3

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

3. www.supremecourteaselaw.com
4. www.scconline.com
-STATUES-
1.The Indian Contract Act, 1872
2. The Indian Majority Act, 1875
3. The Specific Relief Act, 19631.

-BOOKS-

1. Avtar Singh, Principles of Law of Evidence, (26th Edition, Central Law Publications,
2022)
2. 2. Dr. R.K. Bangia , Contract-I ( Allahabad Law Agency )
3. Nilima Bhadbhade, Pollock and Mulla, The Indian Contract and Specific Relief Act
Volume-I
4. Batuk Lal, Law of Evidence, (24th Edition, Central Law Agency, 2023)
5. Prof. S.N. Misra, Indian Penal Code, (22nd Edition, Central Law Publications, 2021)
6. R.V. Kelkar’s, Criminal Procedure Code, (8th Edition, Eastern Book Company, 2023)

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 4

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Prosecution has approached the Hon’ble Session Court of Jaipur under Section 177 CrPC1.

1
Ordinary place of inquiry and trial- Every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a Court within
whose local jurisdiction it was committed.

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 5

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Manvi a 16-year-old student used to work part time at 9 to 9 departmental stores owned by her
father Ramesh in Delhi. Ramesh used to sell stationary and alike items in the store as well.

2. Gurdayal Singh was a renowned trader in stationary items and had a wholesale business of the
same. On 25th January 2023 (Sunday), Gurdayal Singh went to 9 to 9 departmental stores to buy
groceries and met Manvi there.

3. Marvi and Gurdayal Singh had an interesting conversation about business, inflation, and
global economy. Gurdayal Singh was deeply impressed by the knowledge of Mani and asked her
about her field of graduation.

4. Manvi represented her as a major who was enrolled in BA. Economics Hon's programme at
University of Delhi. Having impressed by her, Gurdayal Singh shared his contact details and
asked her to reach out to him for any financial assistance.

5. On 14th February 2023, Manvi contacted Gurdayal Singh and asked him to loan her a sum of
Rs. 2.5 lakhs as she wanted to invest it in her business and expand the 9 to 9 departmental stores.

6. Believing Manvi to be a financially smart woman, Gurdayal Singh agreed to transfer her the
money on the condition that the monthly instalments of Rs. 10,000 shall be made along with
interest @6% per annum from 14th August, 2023. Consequently, a Contract was entered into by
both Manvi and Gurdayal Singh on 15th February, 2023 at Delhi.

7. Manvi spent a sum of Rs. 1 lakh on buying an electric scooter for herself and another sum of
Rs. 50 thousand in giving a lavish dinner and party to her friends.

8. On 14th August, 2023 as against the contract, Manvi did not pay any money back.

Gurdayal Singh waited for another month but Manvi did not pay a single dime back.

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 6

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

9. On 15th October, 2023, Gurdayal Singh sent a legal notice to Manvi but no reply was ever
received. Consequently, Gurdayal Singh filed a suit for recovery in the Court of Delhi. Manvi
claimed that the contract is void on account of minority.

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 7

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

ISSUES RAISED

- ISSUES -

1. WHETHER THERE IS A VALID CONTRACT BETWEEN MANVI AND

GURDAYAL SINGH?

2. WHERE PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO RECOVER THE MONEY LENT IN

THE SUIT FOR RECOVERY?

3. WHETHER THE JUDGEMENT PASSED IN MOHORI BIBEE V.DHARMODAS

GHOSE NEEDS RECONSIDERATION?

4. WHETHER PLAINTIFF CAN SEEK ALTERNATIVE REMEDY UNDER

SECTION 29 OF SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963?

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 8

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 9

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

1. ISSUE-1 WHETHER THERE IS A VALID CONTRACT BETWEEN MANVI AND

GURDAYAL SINGH ?

¶ 1.1 It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Court that in the present issue at hand, there has
been an agreement which is a contract voidable at the option of the Plaintiff owing to the
essentiality of the fact that all agreements to become contracts must incorporate a consent that is
free from any Fraud2, Misrepresentation3 or Coercion4 to enter into such a contract.

1.1.1. MISREPRESENTATION

¶ 1. Therefore, in the instant matter, there lacks presence of a consent that is not influenced by
misrepresentation. Misrepresentation is defined under Section 18 of the Indian contract Act,
18725 which says misrepresentation is a form of a statement made proceeding to the contract
being completed.

¶ 2. It is submitted that Plaintiff who is the party to the contract has given his consent of
advancing loan to the defendant on the pretext of the opposite party representing themselves as a
major and having been graduated from Delhi University with B.A. Honors. Had this deliberate
and conscious misrepresentation not been made on the part of the defaulting party, Plaintiff
would have never consented and agreed to such an agreement.

1.1.2. VOIDABILITY ON THE BASIS OF MISREPRESENTATION

¶ 3. Thereafter, it is most humbly adjoined in this contention raised under the above issue that
according to Section 19 of the Indian contract Act, 1872 6 when consent to an agreement is

2
Mithoolal Nayak vs Life Insurance Corporation Of India, 1962 AIR 814, 1962 SCR Supl. (2) 571
3
Derry v. Peek 1889 LR 14 Cas 337
4
Chikham Amiraju v Chikham Seshamma(1912) 16 IC 344 Mad
5
18. “Misrepresentation” defined.—“Misrepresentation” means and includes—
(1) the positive assertion, in a manner not warranted by the information of the person making it,
of that which is not true, though he believes it to be true;
6
19. Voidability of agreements without free consent.—When consent to an agreement is caused by coercion,1***
fraud or misrepresentation, the agreement is a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so
caused. A party to a contract whose consent was caused by fraud or misrepresentation, may, if he thinks fit, insist
that the contract shall be performed, and that he shall be put in the position in which he would have
been if the representations made had been true.

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 10

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

caused by coercion, fraud or misrepresentation, the agreement is a contract voidable at the option
of the party whose consent was so caused.

¶ 4. Furthermore, it is contested that under the said provision 7, A party to a contract whose consent
was caused by fraud or misrepresentation, may, if he thinks fit, insist that the contract shall be performed,
and that he shall be put in the position in which he would have been if the representations made had been
true.

¶ 5. Going by the Facta Probanda8, Plaintiff had exercised due diligence 9 and ordinary care in
ascertaining and discovering whether the other party was competent to contract according to the
procedure established by concerning law10 under Section 1111, by physically meeting the party and having
fruitful conversation like a prudent person that gave a reasonable impression that Defendant was a
knowledgeable and financially smart woman. Under normal circumstances and as per general rule this
shall be taken as acquiring enough rigour before contracting with other party.

2. ISSUE 2- WHETHER THE PLAINTIFF IS ENTILED TO RECOVER MONEY IN

THE SUIT OF RECOVERY?

¶ 1. In the given Facta Probanda, the defendant being a prudent minor tricked the plaintiff and
took the undue advantage of his sincerity of the contract. The amount paid by the plaintiff was
benefit to the defendant which he is bound to restore.18 Defendant obtained loans from plaintiff
by fraudulently misrepresenting that he was majority at the time of contract. Defendant sued him
to recover the money. If an infant obtains property or goods by misrepresenting his age, he can
be compelled to restore it so long as the same is traceable in his possession. This is known as
equitable Doctrine of Restitution.

7
Para 2 Section 19, Indian Contract Act, 1872.
8
Para 3 & 4, Moot Proposition.
9
MDW Holdings Ltd v Norvill [2021] EWHC 1135 (Ch)
10
The Indian Majority Act, 1875, H.R. Saharay, Dutt on Contract, p. 231.
11
Section 11, Indian Contract Act, 1872.

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 11

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

2.1.1 ESTABLISHED PRECEDENTS

¶ 2. In the case of Leslie Ltd. v. Sheill12, defendant obtained loans from plaintiff by fraudulently
misrepresenting that he has attained majority at the time of contract . Defendant sued him to
recover the money .

¶ 3. Another principle stated in the former case is that the benefit will only be restored if it is
traceable. Relating it to the present case, the property is traceable.

In the case of Khan Gul v. Lakha Singh13, stated that –

(a) Whether a minor who by falsely representing himself to be a major, has induced person to
enter into a contract, is estoppel from pleading minority to avoid the contract.

(b) Whether a party who, when a minor has entered into a contract by means of a false
representation as to his age whether he be defendant or plaintiff in a subsequent litigation, refuse
to perform the contract.

However according to the final verdict of this case, the minor was compelled to refund the
consideration.

¶ 4. In the case of Varghese v. Iype Kuriakose and Ors.,14 the plaintiff filed a suit to cancel a
sale deed signed by him during the minority, the lower court cancelled the suit and issue no
restoration but the High Court overruled the lower court’s possession of the property but have to
restore the benefits he received from the defendant.

¶ 5. Similarly in, T.R. APPASWAMI AIYANGAR V NARAYANSWAMI AIYAR AND ORS.15

Their Lordships think there are materials on the record from which it may be fairly inferred in
the peculiar circumstances of this case that there was a misapprehension as to the private rights.

¶ 6. It was thus that the agreement was discovered to be void, and the discovery, in their
Lordships view, was one within the words and the meaning of Section 65 of the Contract Act 16.
12
1914 3 K.B. 607
13
AIR 1928 Lah 609.
14
AIR 1973 Ker 267
15
(4824) 76 NCI 44
16
65. Obligation of person who has received advantage under void agreement, or contract that becomes void.—
When an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void, any person who has received any
advantage under such agreement or contract is bound to restore it, or to make compensation for it to the person from

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 12

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

The plaintiff, therefore, though not entitled to recover possession of the villages, is entitled to
recover compensation, and in assessing that compensation their Lordships consider it should
include the sum of Rs. 25.000 found by both Courts to have been paid to Indar Singh and also in
the circumstances, of this case, interest. not at the rate or for the period claimed by the plaintiff,
hut at 6 per cent. from the date of the institution of this suit.

2.1.2. THE PRINCIPLE OF RESTITUTION AS CONTAINED IN SECTION 3317 OF THE

NEW SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT OF 1963.

¶ 7. The amended provisions are as follows –

(a) where a void or voidable contract has been cancelled at the instance of the party he may be
required to repay the benefits he/she has received under the contract and also make necessary
compensation to the other party.

(b) when the defendant successfully resists any suit on the ground that the contract is void
against him due to his competence he may be required to repay the benefits if any received by
him under the contract but only to the extent which his estate has been benefitted. This was seen
in the case of Jagar Nath Singh & Ors. v. Laltha Prasad & Ors.,18. The Allahabad High Court
stated that if any underage person induces another person to purchase property from them ,
he/she is liable to pay the benefits received by them due to this transaction before recovering the
possession of the property sold.

¶ 8. The English common law however applied the law of restitution in the case where a minor
misrepresented his age when he entered into a contract. It is the general principle under the
common law, if a minor misrepresented his age and received any money or benefits from the
contract, he must restore it to the person whom he received it provided that it is still identifiable
and within his possession (Rosli,2012). In the case of misrepresentation of age by a minor, it
looks like to cause injustice to the major party who deals with the minor's contract. Although the

whom he received it.

17
33. Power to require benefit to be restored or compensation to be made when instrument is cancelled or is
successfully resisted as being void or voidable.
(b) that the agreement sought to be enforced against him in the suit is void by reason of his not having been
competent to contract under section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872), the court may, if the defendant
has received any benefit under the agreement from the other party, require him to restore, so far as may be, such
benefit to that party, to the extent to which he or his estate has benefited thereby.
18
1 Ind Cas 562

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 13

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

intention of the law is to protect the interest of the minor, but it seems that the new generation
now is different. It is not impossible that the minor who entered into the contract with the
intention to fulfill their needs and interests. If the law still continues to give the opportunity to
the minor to enter into the contract in the case of misrepresentation of age, then this will continue
to give injustice to the major party who deals with him

¶ 9. In accordance with the Report of Law Commission 19, it considered that loans of money to a minor for
the purchase of necessities (or necessaries, if that concept is retained) should be recoverable whether or
not the money was in fact used for that purpose: in other words, the loan contract would be binding on the
minor the adult would be entitled to apply to the court for compensation from the minor based on
Restitutionary rather than contractual principles.

¶ 10. The second advantage to the Restitutionary approach is that it goes a good way to ensuring that a
minor may not, as he may under the present law, use the defense of minority as a means of wrongfully
profiting at the expense of the adult.20

¶ 11. Per Section 3321, again it is put forth that where a defendant successfully resists any suit on the
ground—that the agreement sought to be enforced against him in the suit is void by reason of his not
having been competent to contract under section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872), the
court may, if the defendant has received any benefit under the agreement from the other party, require
him to restore, so far as may be, such benefit to that party, to the extent to which he or his estate has
benefited thereby

2.1.2. A) Any benefit to Estate is Restorable

¶ 12. In the given Facta Probanda22, the defendant has spent the loaned amount on unnecessary luxuries
like throwing lavish dinners and partying with friends on the false guise of claiming to invest the loaned
money on expansion of her business. Defendant has manipulatively exhausted an amount of 1 lac on
buying an electric scooter which forms part of his estate and under the provision of Section 33 (2)(b) 23,
the same is required to be restored back to the innocent Plaintiff who trusted the faulty defendant. No
doubt the amount spent on dinner party is untraceable owing to the nature of the thing but the plaintiff

19
THE LAW REFORM COMMISSION AN COIMISIÚN UM ATHCHÓIRIÚ AN DLÍ (LRC 15 – 1985) REPORT
ON MINORS' CONTRACTS, IRELAND, The Law Reform Commission, Ardilaun Centre, 111 St Stephen's Green,
Dublin 2.
20
Cf. the Law Reform Commission of British Columbia, Report on Minors' Contracts, p. 49 (LRC 26–1976).
21
The Specific Relief Act, 1963.
22
Para 7, Moot Proposition.
23
The Specific Relief Act, 1963.

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 14

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

pleads for justice to be done otherwise it can start a series of rampant misuse of minor’s position and
disguised protection offered even though minority is clearly just an age when defendant is capable of
strategizing such transactions in her favour.

¶ 13. Therefore, it is sincerely pleaded that minority cannot and should not be protected when it is evident
that such a minor has the required psychological potential 24 of defrauding with the contracting part just
like an adult and consequently similar laws must be placed for enforcing their liabilities to such extents.

2.1.3 THE RESTITUTIONARY PRINCIPLE SHOULD APPLY AS PER SECTION 73,

INDIAN CONTRACT ACT,197225

¶ 14. Additionally, it is humbly submitted by counsel on the behalf of the plaintiff that according to
Section 73[2], When a contract has been broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to
receive, from the party who has broken the contract, compensation for any loss or damage caused to him
thereby, which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach, or which the parties knew,
when they made the contract, to be likely to result from the breach of it. Such compensation is not to be
given for any remote and indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach.

¶ 15. Compensation for failure to discharge obligation resembling those created by contract.—When an
obligation resembling those created by contract has been incurred and has not been discharged, any
person injured by the failure to discharge it is entitled to receive the same compensation from the party in
default, as if such person had contracted to discharge it and had broken his contract. In estimating the loss
or damage arising from a breach of contract, the means which existed of remedying the inconvenience
caused by the non-performance of the contract must be taken into account.

¶ 16. In the instant case the plaintiff and the defendant entered into contract 15th February,2023 at Delhi
according to which Gurdayal Singh had agreed to transfer a sum of Rs. 2.5 lakhs as a loan to Manvi on
the condition that the monthly installments of Rs. 10,000 shall be made along with interest @6% p.a.
from 14th August, 2023. But on 14th August, 2023 as against the contract, Manvi did not pay any money
back consequently the plaintiff waited for another month but Manvi still did not pay a single dime back.

¶ 17. It is further submitted that the plaintiff even sent a legal notice to Manvi on 15th October, 2023 but
still no reply was ever received which left the plaintiff with the last resort of filing a suit for recovery in

24
Kashiba v. Shripat , (1894) 19 Bom 697.
25
73.Compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract.—When a contract has been broken, the party
who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive, from the party who has broken the contract, compensation for any
loss or damage caused to him thereby, which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach, or
which the parties knew, when they made the contract, to be likely to result from the breach of it. Such compensation
is not to be given for any remote and indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach.

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 15

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

this Honorable court. Hence, it is stated that the plaintiff tried his level best to settle the issue outside the
court so as to respect this honorable court's time and to perform his end of the bargain honestly. As a
result, it is claimed that there must be granted equity in restitution to the plaintiff.

2.1.4. THE RESTITUTIONARY PRINCIPLE SHOULD APPLY AS PER SECTION 65, INDIAN
CONTRACT ACT,197226

¶ 18. When an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void, any person who has
received any advantage under such agreement or contract is bound to restore it, or to make compensation
for it to the person from whom he received it.

¶ 19. It is evident from the facts of the case that the agreement was discovered to be void when the
plaintiff filed the suit for recovery and there after defendant claim that the contract is void on the account
of her minority which was the material fact hidden from the plaintiff so as to constitute misrepresentation
and fraud on the part of the defendant. Conforming to the above provision, any unfair advantage received
by the defaulting party under an agreement discovered to be void is bound to restore back to the party
who was taken advantage of.

¶ 20. A catena of judicial pronouncements advance the jurisprudence of protecting and favoring minor by
discharging their liability so as to create no obligation on the part of minor but in accordance with the
Law Commission's alternative proposal, as we have mentioned, 27 was of a far more radical nature. Under
it, the following rules would apply. All contracts of whatever nature would be fully binding on minors
aged 16 years and over;28 a minor below the age of 16 would have no liability under or by reason of any
contract.29

3. ISSUE 3- WHETHER THE JUDGEMENT PASSED IN MOHORI BIBEE V.

DHARMODAS GHOSE NEEDS RECONSIDERATION?

3.1 PER CASE OF MOHORI BIBEE-

26
65. Obligation of person who has received advantage under void agreement, or contract that becomes void.—
When an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void, any person who has received any
advantage under such agreement or contract is bound to restore it, or to make compensation for it to the person from
whom he received it.
27
Law Commission Working Paper No. 81, Minors' Contracts, paras. 12.1–1218 (1982).
28
Gorely v. Codd [1967] 1 W.L.R. 19 ,
29
McKay v. Essex Area Health Authority [1982] Q.B. 1166

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 16

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

It is respectfully submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the judgement passed in Mohori Bibee
v. Dharmodar Ghose30 needs reconsideration, it being outdated and inconsistent with the
presently changed circumstances and advancements that provide unfair oppurtunities to the
defaulting minors to seek immoderate interest in their favor notwithstanding the unbiased
protection given by law to such minors only for the sake of minority.

3.1.1 The counsel on the behalf of Plaintiff therefore pleads under the above issue that the very
judgement which is the prime basis of discussion and ascertainment of the case in hand today
must be rethought upon because the appellant was not aware of the age of the respondent . It
should be amended with the changing time and circumstances. The case of Mohori Bibee v.
Dharmodas Ghose was held many years ago and the judgement of the case passed as per the
circumstances of the case

Nowadays, the case filed or suit filed in the court has different circumstances and these suits
shouldn’t be upheld on the basis of Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose judgement as minors are
taking advantage of it and the aggrieved party is at loss. This case lacked certain aspects. For
instance-

1.1.1. A) Principle of Estoppel31

¶ 1. This Honorable court may shift its attention to the certitude that the former precedent
referred didn’t discuss the applicability of the principle of estoppel, as When a person at
whose option a contract is voidable rescinds it, the other party thereto need not perform any
promise therein contained in which he is promiser. The party rescinding a voidable contract
shall, if he has received any benefit thereunder from another party to such contract, restore
such benefit, so far as may be, to the person from whom it was received.

¶ 2. Doctrine of Estoppel is that provision which prohibits a person from giving false evidence by
preventing them from making contradicting statements in a Court of Law. The objective of this
doctrine is to avert the commission of fraud by one person against another person. This doctrine holds
a person accountable for false representations made by him, either through his words or through his
conduct. Section 115 Estoppel : This section incorporates the meaning of estoppel as when one person
either by his act or omission, or by declaration, has made another person believe something to be true

30
ILR (1903) 30 Cal 539 (Pc).
31
Soans v. London and South Western Railway, (1919120 LT 598)

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 17

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

and persuaded that person to act upon it, then in no case can he or his representative deny the truth of
that thing later in the suit or in the proceedings. In simple words, estoppel means one cannot
contradict, deny or declare to be false the previous statement made by him in the Court 32.

3.1.2 LAW COMMISON REPORT

¶ 3. Law Commsission has time and again argued that the Principle of Estoppel if, applied on minors
that have the pre required mens rea to conduct such fraudualent transaction, it would comprehensibly
plain out complications in the question of working out their liability 33.

¶ 4. Furthermore, it presented that although the minors are able to enjoy the goods, they are
stopped from obtaining undue benefit from any transaction. The doctrine of restitution comes
to play, requiring such minors to restore back the exact goods that have been transferred to
them as long as they are traceable and in their possession. But the doctrine is inapplicable in
case such goods are consumed, transferred or become non-traceable due to which the other
party suffers loss.

¶ 5. The entire judicial mechanism helps minors, with the judges as their councillors and law
as their guardian. But merely protecting the minors' interest should not amount to their unjust
enrichment, creating unnecessary hardships for the persons dealing with a minor. (A.V. v.
iParadigms, Co )34

¶ 6. Where there is a breach of contracts, the resulting damages will have to be paid by the party
breaching the contract to the aggrieved party and the Section73 of the Indian Contract Act , 1872
deals with direct damages.

¶ 7. In this case the court also held that Section 64 35 & 65 are not applicable in void agreements.
However, the law commission of India disagrees with the interpretation given by the Privy
Council to Section 65. In their view Section 65 covers the case of a minor who makes a false

32
Pickard v. Sears [(1832) Ad & El 469]
33
Cf. Payne, The Contractual Liability of Infants, 5 Western L. Rev. 136, at 136 (1966). See also Norwood National
Bank v Allston, 152 S.C. 119, 149 S.E. 593, 65 A.L.R. 133 (1929).
34
544 F. Supp. 2d 473 (E.D. Va. 2008)
35
64. Consequences of rescission of voidable contract.—When a person at whose option a contract is voidable
rescinds it, the other party thereto need not perform any promise therein contained in which he is promisor. The
party rescinding a voidable contract shall, if he have received any benefit thereunder from another party to such
contract, restore such benefit, so far as may be, to the person from whom it was received.

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 18

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

representation that he is a major & such a minor should be asked to pay compensation. They
recommended that an application be added to Section 65 to give effect to their opinion 36.

¶ 8. No amendment of the Indian Contract Act is made so far as to give effect to law
commission. Moreover, the law has a wider scope and is dynamic in nature. It should be
amended with the changing time and circumstances.

¶ 9. Obligation of person who has received advantage under void agreement, or contract that
becomes void.—When an agreement is discovered to be void, or when a contract becomes void,
any person who has received any advantage under such agreement or contract is bound to restore
it, or to make compensation for it to the person from whom he received it.

¶ 10. The Law Commission of India in their different reports suggested some amendments, thus
new sections are designed and proposed in doctrine of estoppels, Specific Relief Act and Indian
Contract Act. Minority should be used as a shield and not as a sword. It is suggested that the
majority should not be strictly based on age but on the psychological capacities of the minors at
the time of forming such an agreement. A minor must do equity, if he anticipates the same.

1.1.2. A) LOANS TO MINOR-

¶ 11. It considered that loans of money to a minor for the purchase of necessities (or necessaries, if that
concept is retained) should be recoverable whether or not the money was in fact used for that purpose: in
other words, the loan contract would be binding on the minor37.

4. ISSUE 4- WHETHER PLAINTIFF CAN SEEK ALTERNATIVE REMDY UNDER

SECTION 29 OF SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963?

4.1 Lastly, after considering the above issues, the counsel for the Plaintiff avers to the
examination of whether an alternative remedy under Section 29, of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
could be requested whilst demanding specific relief under section 33 in the aforementioned issue.
36
Cf. In re Rhodes. Rhodes v Rhodes, 44 Ch. D. 94, at 107 (C.A., per Lindley, L.J., 1890); and see Miles, “An
Infant's Liability for Necessaries”, 43 L. Q. Rev. 389, at 391 (1927).

37
Earle v Peale, 1 Salk. 386, 91 E.R. 336 (1711) (where Parker, C.J., stated (at pp. 387 and 336 respectively) that
the money “may be borrowed for necessaries, but laid out and spent at a tavern”). See also Probart v Knouth, 2 Esp.
472n; 172 E.R. 423 (1783), Darby v Boucher, 1 Salk. 279, 91 E.R. 244 (1694), Ellis v Ellis, 3 Salk. 197, 91 E.R. 774
(1698).

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 19

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

4.1.1. PER SECTION 2938, SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

¶ 1. It is humbly submitted that in consonance with the Section 29 of the Act an alternative prayer for
rescission in suit for specific performance is obtainable—A plaintiff instituting a suit for the specific
performance of a contract in writing may pray in the alternative that, if the contract cannot be specifically
enforced, it may be rescinded and delivered up to be cancelled; and the court, if it refuses to enforce the
contract specifically, may direct it to be rescinded and delivered up accordingly.

¶ 2. Therefore, in the light of the facts of the case at hand, if such alternative remedy is accessible in this
honorable court in order to provide equitable justice to the virtuous Plaintiff, then it would encompass the
operation of Section 30 of the same said act39 to complete the process of law.

4.1.2 PER SECTION 30, SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

¶ 3. The counsel for the plaintiff finally supports their case by uncompromising with the process of this
honorable Court by mentioning the provision of Section 30 40 which administers that this esteemed bench
may require parties rescinding to do equity.—On adjudging the rescission of a contract, the court may
require the party to whom such relief is granted to restore, so far as may be, any benefit which he may
have received from the other party and to make any compensation to him which justice may require.

¶ 4. Accordingly, the defendant must give back what he gained unlawfully in form of compensation or
relief through the wide discretion of this court.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, IN THE LIGHT OF FACTS MENTIONED, ARGUMENTS ADVANCED, AND AUTHORITIES

CITED, IT IS MOST HUMBLY PRAYED AND IMPLORED BEFORE THE HON’BLE SESSION COURT OF
JAIPUR, THAT IT MAY BE GRACIOUSLY PLEASED TO ADJUDICATE AND DECLARE THAT:

I. A

38
29. Alternative prayer for rescission in suit for specific performance.—A plaintiff instituting a suit for the specific
performance of a contract in writing may pray in the alternative that, if the contract cannot be specifically enforced,
it may be rescinded and delivered up to be cancelled; and the court, if it refuses to enforce the contract specifically,
may direct it to be rescinded and delivered up accordingly.
39
Specific relief act, 1963
40
. 30. Court may require parties rescinding to do equity.—On adjudging the rescission of a contract, the court may
require the party to whom such relief is granted to restore, so far as may be, any benefit which he may have received
from the other party and to make any compensation to him which justice may require.

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 20

 9TH SEMESTER COMPULSORY MOOT 2023

AND ANY OTHER RELIEF THAT THE HON’BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO GRANT IN THE

INTEREST OF JUSTICE, EQUITY AND GOOD CONSCIENCE.

For this act of Kindness, The Prosecution shall duty bound forever pray.

All of which is humbly submitted.

Sd/-

~COUNSEL ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF~

MEMORIAL for PLAINTIFF Page 21