Minor Agreement In Business Law
a mortgage minor in this case is his property in favor of Brahmo Dutt, the defendant lawyer at the time of the transaction was aware of the complainant as a minor, was sued against Brahmo Dutt of Dharmodas Ghose on the grounds that Dharmodas was a minor when he executed the mortgage and the mortgage was to be cancelled and the mortgage should be cancelled. the judgment was cancelled, so the mortgage facility is also cancelled. Two conditions must be met for the estate of minors to be responsible for the needs (a) the needs made available to the minor must be truly necessary to support the life of a minor. b) these needs should not be adequately taken care of by the minor beforehand. A minor may be a commitment or a beneficiary of a contract. Because of its minority, it cannot commit to a contract, but it can take advantage of the treaty. The exceptions to the contractual agreement of minors are that those under the age of 18 are called minors. Any agreement with minors is not valid from the outset. it is null and void, so there are no legal obligations arising from the contract and contract of a minor himself, so that no one who has not reached the age of majority can enter into a contract. If a minor misrepresents his or her age and then declares that he or she is a minor, the contract is still not valid. A minor may walk away from a contract (it is called “disgust” or “nullity” of the contract).
Of course, it must return the money or continue. All agreements with a minor are totally unst soured. Therefore, a minor cannot be declared insolvent. An agreement reached by a minor cannot be confirmed by him on obtaining a majority. The reason is that the agreement on minors was concluded from the beginning and is therefore not valid by ratification. When a minor enters into a contract, the parents are not parties and cannot be held liable if the minor does not comply with the contractual terms. But if a parent or both parents sign a contract with the minor, the contract is valid and they are subject to the conditions. This means that when a person obtains goods or goods through misrepresentation, he or she may be forced to restore them to the person from whom they have received them. This doctrine also applies to minors. But the miner may be forced to restore the property or the goods as long as the same thing can be traced back into his possession. 1) A minor`s agreement is invalid from the outset: a contractual agreement for a person under the age of 18 in India is considered invalid from the outset, just as a minor cannot enter into a contract. The agreement of a minor is easily explained by the case of Mohori Bibee V.
Dharmodas Ghose. A contract entered into in his favour by the guardian of a minor: in this case, the minor who is a promise can sue the unfulfilled party. In the case of Great American Insurance v. Madan Lal, the guardian entered into an insurance contract on behalf of his son on the fire of the miner`s property. When the property was damaged, compensation for the minor was called into question, the contract was refused by the insurer because of the minor`s inability to enter into a contract. Subsequently, however, it was found that this contract was enforceable and the insurer is liable to the guardian. A minor is allowed to draw, negotiate or approve negotiable instruments. It may be noted, however, that the minor assumes no personal responsibility for these instruments. But the minor can enforce the negotiable instruments that have been executed 8) No insolvency: the minor is not able to pay debts and taxes on the personal assets of the minor, he is not held personally responsible, which makes him insolvent if the minor has complied with his obligation: in a contract, a person under the age of 18 cannot become a promise but can promise.