NAVAKOTI NARAYANA CHETTY Vs. LOYALINGA CHETTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for decision in this second appeal is whether the sale evidenced by Exhibit-A is void.

(2.) The District Judge has held that as the sale was made to a minor (the 1st defendant) it is void under the ruling of the Privy Council in the case of Mohori Bibee V/s. Dharmodas Ghose 30 C. 539; 7 C.W.N. 541; 5 Bom. L.R. 421.

(3.) I think that the decision of the District Judge is right. A sale is a transfer of ownership in exchange for a price paid or promised or part paid and part promised (section 54 Transfer of Property Act) and it is, in my opinion, impossible to conceive of a price being settled except as the result of an agreement between the parties. In other words a sale necessarily involves the idea of a contract as its foundation, and the Privy Council has held that a contract by a minor is not merely voidable at the option of a minor but is void.