T T AUGUSTINE Vs. CHANGANACHERRY MUNICIPALITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The defendant is the appellant. The suit is by the Changanacherry Municipality for the balance amount due from the defendant who was an agent of the plaintiff Municipality for the sale of raffle tickets in respect of the Changanacherry Municipal Stadium Fund Raffle conducted by the Municipality with the sanction of the Government. The defendant raised various contentions in defence to the suit. All his contentions were overruled and the suit was decreed by the Trial Court. The decision of the Trial Court was confirmed in appeal by the lower appellate court

(2.) That the defendant was an agent of the plaintiff-Municipality for the sale of raffle tickets is not in dispute. The only point urged by the learned Counsel for the defendant appellant is that the contract of agency is for a purpose of wager opposed to S.30 of the Indian Contract Act and hence the suit is not maintainable. As per S.30 of the Indian Contract Act, 'agreements by way of wager are void and no suit shall be brought for recovering anything alleged to be won on any wager or entrusted to any person to abide the result of any game or other uncertain event on which any wager is made". A contract of agency for sale of raffle tickets is not an agreement by way of wager is clear from the language of the Section itself. A raffle itself may constitute several agreements by way of wager by the person promoting the raffle and the persons purchasing tickets with the object of winning the prize depending on the uncertain event of a draw in favour of the ticket holder

(3.) The further question is whether the contract of agency is unlawful within the meaning of S.23 of the Indian Contract Act. As per S.23 the consideration or object of an agreement is lawful unless it is forbidden by law or the court regards it as immoral or opposed to public policy.