Exceptions To The Doctrine of Privity of Contract
Exceptions To The Doctrine of Privity of Contract
Exceptions To The Doctrine of Privity of Contract
the doctrine of
privity of
contract
By,
Megha R Ajit
Reg no: 1712135
Course: 1 Bcom F&A
An agreement enforceable by law is a contract.
The Indian Contract Act, 1872 was passed by the British India and contains
the law relating to contracts that occur in India. It is based on the principles of
English Common Law and is applicable to all the states in India except Jammu and
Kashmir. It states the circumstances under which the promises made by the
parties to a contract shall be legally binding and the enforcement of these rights
and duties.
The Act originally contained 266 sections and was later converted into two
parts:
Part 1 deals with the General Principles of Law of Contract (Sections 1 to 75)
Part 2 deals with Special kinds of Contracts such as
(a) Contract of Indemnity and Guarantee
(b) Contract of Bailment and Pledge
(c) Contract of Agency
For this assignment, Ill be focusing the rule Doctrine of Privity of Contract
and its exceptions.
Now lets take a look at some of the exceptions to privity of contract. This
means that even though someone was not directly involved in the contract,
he/she might still be able to sue the partied involved. For example, in case of a
trust beneficiary, who is the person who receives assets from a trust, can sue the
trustee, who oversees the trust and gives pout the asset in accordance of the
contract undertaken by him, if the trustee is not following the rules of the
contract.
A husband who was separated from his wife executed a separation deed by which
he promised to pay to the trustees, all the expenses for the maintenance of his
wife. Held, the agreement created a trust in favour of his wife and wife could
claim such amount though not a party to the contract.
Mr.A had a son Mr.X and Mr.B had a daughter Mis.Y. A agreed with B that in
consideration of the marriage of Y with X, he would pay to Y, his daughter-in-law,
an allowance of 500 a month in perpetuity. Layer on Y claimed 500 from A which
A refused to pay. Held, Y although not a party to the agreement between A and B,
was clearly entitled to recover the arrears of the allowance.