Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 2 views

    BL Case 6

    Uploaded by

    abhirupxime
    Dharma lent money to Savithri when her husband was hospitalized, and Savithri agreed by contract to marry Dharma if her husband died. Savithri now argues the contract is void due to undue influence, as she was under mental and physical distress. Dharma argues Savithri breached the contract. The document discusses remedies available to Dharma if the court finds a breach, including ordering Savithri to perform the contract or awarding damages. The relevant law considers a person in a position to dominate another's will if they make a contract when the other's mental capacity is affected by illness or distress.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    BL Case 6

    Uploaded by

    abhirupxime
    2 views1 page
    Dharma lent money to Savithri when her husband was hospitalized, and Savithri agreed by contract to marry Dharma if her husband died. Savithri now argues the contract is void due to undue influence, as she was under mental and physical distress. Dharma argues Savithri breached the contract. The document discusses remedies available to Dharma if the court finds a breach, including ordering Savithri to perform the contract or awarding damages. The relevant law considers a person in a position to dominate another's will if they make a contract when the other's mental capacity is affected by illness or distress.

    Original Title

    BL-Case-6

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Dharma lent money to Savithri when her husband was hospitalized, and Savithri agreed by contract to marry Dharma if her husband died. Savithri now argues the contract is void due to undue influence, as she was under mental and physical distress. Dharma argues Savithri breached the contract. The document discusses remedies available to Dharma if the court finds a breach, including ordering Savithri to perform the contract or awarding damages. The relevant law considers a person in a position to dominate another's will if they make a contract when the other's mental capacity is affected by illness or distress.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    2 views1 page

    BL Case 6

    Uploaded by

    abhirupxime
    Dharma lent money to Savithri when her husband was hospitalized, and Savithri agreed by contract to marry Dharma if her husband died. Savithri now argues the contract is void due to undue influence, as she was under mental and physical distress. Dharma argues Savithri breached the contract. The document discusses remedies available to Dharma if the court finds a breach, including ordering Savithri to perform the contract or awarding damages. The relevant law considers a person in a position to dominate another's will if they make a contract when the other's mental capacity is affected by illness or distress.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    6) In this case Dharma is in a position to dominate the will of Savithri.

    It is a case of undue influence


    by Dharma on savithri.

    Arguments on behalf Savithri: Savithri can argue that at the time when contract was made she
    was under mental bodily distress because of her husband’s hospitalisation, so, Dharma had used
    undue influence on her, in which case,the contract stands void.

    Arguments on behalf of Dharma: Dharma can argue that he gave money to savithri only
    because she had agreed to the contract of getting married to him, in case her husband dies.
    There is a breach of contract if savithri does not marries him now. So, in case of breach of
    contract, the aggrieved party i.e. Dharma in this case, can demand for the following remedies:

    a) Suit for specific performance: the court can direct savithri to perform the promise according
    to the terms of contract.
    b) Suit for injunction
    c) Suit for damages, for loss sustained: damages are given by restitution and as monetory
    compensation to the injured party. So, dharma can ask for monetary compensation.

    Relevant Section:

    Under Section 16(2) of the Act: “A person is deemed to be in a position to dominate the will of
    another-

    a) Where he holds a real or apparent authority over the other; or


    b) Where he stands in a fiduciary relation to the other; or
    c) Where he makes a contract with a person whose mental capacity is temporarily or
    permanently affected by reason of age, illness, or mental bodily distress.”

    My perspective:

    The contract was made at the time when Savithri’s husband, Satya was in a critical condition in
    hospital. Savithri was clearly not in a state of mind where she could have made a wise decision.
    She was in dire need of money and she could have done or agreed to anything to get money for
    her husband’s treatment. Whoever lent money to her at that point of time would have been in a
    position to dominate her will. So, Dharma used undue influence on savithri to make her agree to
    the contract. So, the contract stands void.

    You might also like