Home › CA Foundation › businesslaw › Consideration › In Durga Prasad v. Baldeo, the promise to pay co…
In Durga Prasad v. Baldeo, the promise to pay commission was unenforceable because the consideration (constructing the market) was furnished at the desire of:
AA trustee
BA third party (the Collector), not the promisor
CThe promisor
DThe promisee alone
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: B. A third party (the Collector), not the promisor
Consideration must move at the desire of the promisor. As the market was built at the Collector's desire, not the promisor's, there was no consideration and the promise was void.
Related questions
In Kedarnath v. Gorie Mohammad, a promise to subscribe to a charitable purpose was held enUnder Section 185, what consideration is necessary to create an agency?A written, signed promise to pay a debt barred by the law of limitation is enforceable witFor an agreement made without consideration on the ground of natural love and affection toWhich of the following is NOT an exception to the rule 'no consideration, no contract'?As a general rule under Section 25, an agreement made without consideration is:A promise to pay money to a person for doing something he is already legally bound to do iAccording to Section 2(d), consideration may be: