De Facto IAS
Minor’s Agreement
In Indian law, agreements entered into by Mohori Bibee vs. Dharmodas Ghose
minors are deemed void from the outset, as The landmark case that illuminates this
detailed in the Indian Contract Act of 1872. principle is Mohori Bibee vs. Dharmodas
This provision safeguards minors from Ghose (1903). In this case, a minor
potential exploitation and ensures that they mortgaged his property to secure a loan.
are not unfairly bound by contractual
obligations. The Privy Council held that as the mortgagor
was a minor, the mortgage was void and
The Indian Contract Act, 1872 could not be enforced. This decision firmly
The Act clearly states that a minor is not established that the law would not recognize
competent to contract, as per Section 11. any contract entered into by a minor.
Therefore, any contract signed by a minor is Exception of Necessaries: Section 68 of
void and cannot be enforced in a court of law, the Indian Contract Act
protecting minors from legal obligations they Under Indian Contract Law, Section 68
are not prepared to handle. stands as a pivotal exception to the general
rule that minors cannot be bound by
This provision reflects a societal and legal contracts.
acknowledgment of the vulnerability of
minors. This specific section permits the enforcement
of agreements for the provision of
Since they are presumed not to have the "necessaries" to a minor.
mature judgement necessary to engage in
contracts, the law steps in to annul such The term "necessaries" refers to goods or
engagements, ensuring minors are shielded services that are essential for maintaining the
from binding themselves in agreements that minor's existing standard of living and health,
may not be in their best interests. including basic necessities like food, clothing,
Important Links for Judiciary Free Resources
(Click on Each to Open Respective Pages)
Subject Wise Mains PYQ Solution Essay for Judiciary
Subject Wise Notes Legal Doctrines
Landmark Judgements GS Notes
Weekly Current Affair Subject Wise Prelims PYQ Solution
Free Answer Writing Course Judgement Writing
Telegram Link Youtube Link
www.defactojudiciary.in
De Facto IAS
shelter, and medical care. This provision The Complexity of Restitution
ensures that minors are not deprived of The principle of restitution introduces
essential needs due to their legal incapacity significant challenges when dealing with
to enter into contracts. The law thereby contracts involving minors. This principle is
allows suppliers of such necessaries to seek rooted in the idea that a minor should not be
reimbursement from the minor's estate or unjustly enriched at the expense of another.
property, effectively balancing the protection
of minors with the rights of vendors who Therefore, if a minor has entered into a
provide essential goods and services. contract under false pretences (e.g., by
misrepresenting their age) or has received
benefits from a void contract, they are
generally expected to return the benefits to
avoid unjust enrichment.
However, this becomes complex in practice.
The law must balance between protecting the
minor from exploitative contracts and
preventing them from exploiting their legal
Nash vs. Inman (1908) immunity to contract.
Although originating in British courts, Nash
vs. Inman is frequently cited in Indian legal Courts often struggle with deciding whether,
discussions due to its clarity on the concept how much, and what kind of benefits a minor
of "necessaries." In this case, a tailor should return, especially when the minor no
supplied clothes to a university student who longer possesses the goods or has
was a minor. consumed the benefits.
The court had to decide whether these items These cases necessitate a careful judicial
were necessaries. The ruling stated that the approach, ensuring fairness to the other party
supplied goods must not only be essential for while upholding the protective intent of the
survival but should also be appropriate to the law towards minors.
minor’s lifestyle and actual needs at the time
of sale.
This judgement emphasises that what
qualifies as necessaries must be evaluated in
the context of the minor's social and
economic conditions, not merely based on
generic needs.
This precedent is significant in Indian law as
it guides courts in determining the scope of
Section 68, adapting the definition of
necessaries to the diverse socio-economic
backgrounds of minors in India.
www.defactojudiciary.in
