High Courts(1891) 09 MAD CK 0007

Alfred Schonlank and Another vs A. Muthunayana Chetti

Madras High Court · Decided on 2 September 1891 · Citation: (1892) 2 MLJ 57

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 163 words
1.

The question referred to the High Court is, ""was the defendant justified in revoking his proposal to sell indigo to the plaintiff before the expiry of

the time which the defendant without consideration allowed to the plaintiffs, to express their acceptance or refusal?"" Both on principle and authority

it is clear that in the absence of consideration for the promise to keep the offer open for a time, the promise is a mere nudum pactum. This is indeed

conceded by the learned Counsel, but it is urged by him that upon the finding of the Chief Judge, there was consideration for the promise, but the

learned judges, who made the reference to the High Court, distinctly find that there was no consideration, and differ from the opinion of the Chief

Judge.

2.

In the absence of any reference on the question of consideration, we must accept the fact as found by the Bench, and answer the question

referred to in the affirmative.