urchased a used car from Serr" <4> for K,?0.
(o#$in' attemted to return the car to Serr" after discoerin' that the main bearin' #as defectie and #as informed that reairs #ou$d cost K?@:K=@. P $eft the car #ith 4 and mai$ed a $etter disaffirmin' the contract. P sued 4 for the return of his mone" and the tria$ court entered jud'ment for 4 on the 'rounds that the contract #as not oidab$e2 because PLs aunt and 'randmother accomanied P #hen he urchased the car and 'ae him the mone" to urchase it. P aea$ed. Issue0 +s a urchase contract b" a minor oidab$e desite the articiation of an adu$t in the
transaction 3o&ding and /u&e0 Fes. A urchase contract b" a minor is oidab$e desite the articiation
of an adu$t in the transaction. The court he$d that the articiation of PLs aunt and 'randmother in the transaction did not chan'e the ru$e that contracts b" a minor re'ardin' ersona$ roert" are oidab$e. The eidence sho#ed that the sa$e #as made bet#een P and 4 and not one of the adu$ts. 4 #as fu$$" a#are of PLs a'e #hen the sa$e #as ne'otiated and P had eer" ri'ht to disaffirm the sa$e. 4 had the burden to sho# that the car #as a necessit" and 4 did not meet that burden.
Pettit v. Liston6 2acts
Pettit
2 a minor2 contracted #ith *iston <4> for the urchase of a motorc"c$e. Pettit made an initia$ a"ment of K,/@ and thereafter #as to a" K/@ er month. After one month Pettit dama'ed the motorc"c$e and attemted to return it2 demandin' that *iston return the K,/@ do$$ars he had aid. *iston refused to refund the mone" because Pettit had caused K,@ in dama'e to the motorc"c$e. The tria$ court dismissed the case and Pettit aea$ed.
5 133 Ind. App. 692, 184 N.E.2d 901 (1962) 6 97 Or. 464 (1920)
Issue
+f a minor seeks to rescind a sa$es contract after usin' and dama'in' the urchased roduct2 is the minor resonsib$e for dereciation in a$ue or dama'es 3o&ding and /u&e
+f a minor seeks to rescind a sa$es contract after usin' and dama'in' the urchased roduct2 the minor must comensate the se$$er for dereciation and dama'es to the item if he or she #as treated fair$". +f the minor #as treated fair$" and as an adu$t consumer2 as here2 the $a# does not e7emt him from the ob$i'ation to comensate for dama'es and dereciation. There #as no a$$e'ation or eidence that Pettit #as taken adanta'e of or oerchar'ed.
4o render minor5s estate &iab&e for necessaries two conditions must be satisfied. The contract must be for the 'oods reasonab$" necessar" for his suort in his station in $ife. The minor must not hae a$read" a sufficient su$" of these necessaries.
Liabi&ity for necessaries The case of necessaries su$ied to a minor or to an" other erson #hom such minor is $e'a$$" bound to suort is 'oerned b" section - of the +ndian Contract Act. A c$aim for necessaries su$ied to a minor is enforceab$e b" $a#. (ut a minor not $iab$e for an" rice that he ma" romise and neer for more than the a$ue of the necessaries. There is no ersona$ $iabi$it" of the minor2 but on$" his roert" is $iab$e.
Doctrine of /estitution +f an infant obtains a roert" b" misreresentin' his a'e2 he can be come$$ed to restore it2 but on$" so $on' as the roert" remains in his ossession. This is kno#n as the e1uitab$e doctrine of restitution.
MI$6/ I$ A 6$4/A4 62 *A/4$/'3I* A bare readin' of Section B0 makes it c$ear that the aforementioned section dea$s #ith the ri'hts
Minor can be admitted on&y to the benefits of a %artnershi% The Secia$ Committee consistin' of Shri (rojender *a$ Mitter2 Sir 4in Sha# Mu$$a2 Sir A$$adi ;rishnas#ami +"er and Sir Arthur E''ar #hich drafted the bi$$ #hich $ead to the enactment of the resent Act obsered that the" did not hae an" articu$ar$" satisfactor" reason to deart from the 'enera$ rinci$e of Contract *a# stated in both Section ,, and the jud'ment of the Pri" Counci$ in Mahori Bibi’s case. Moreoer2 the" obsered that it had been the 'enera$ $a# in +ndia eer since ,- that minors cou$d be entit$ed to the benefits of a artnershi. Thus2 in ie# of these obserations the Committee decided not to a$$o# minors to be a art of the artnershi since the artnershi is the resu$t of a contract #hich a minor is incaab$e of bein' a art" to. The"2 ho#eer2 a$$o#ed a minor to enjo" the benefits of a artnershi. As has been obsered in the Sanyasi Charan Mandal v. Krishnadhan case since a IfirmJ under Section ?
bet#een on$" minors. To ut it more sim$"2 there must be an e7istin' artnershi bet#een t#o major artners before a minor can be admitted to its benefits. The 9i'h Court of A$$ahabad he$d in the Hardutt Ray Gajadhar Ram v. Commissioner of Income a!" that a deed #hich diided the ri'hts and ob$i'ations e1ua$$" amon'st the three
major and the $one minor artner #as ina$id as it #as in contraention of Section B0 as it besto#ed uon the minor not on$" the benefits of the artnershi2 but a$so the $iabi$ities of ersona$ nature
Patna 9i'h Court in Sahai Bros. v. Commissioner of Income a! *+ and the (omba" 9i'h Court in %,ara$adas Khetan - Co. v. Commissioner of Income a!** #as of the ie# een if the artnershi deed did make minor a fu$$:f$ed'ed artner $ike a$$ other artners insofar as makin' him ersona$$" $iab$e2 the deed shou$d be read $ibera$$" and his $iabi$ities to be confined in accordance #ith Section B0. +n the $andmark Commissioner of Incometa! v. %,ar$adas Khetan and Co case,/2 ho#eer2 the Sureme Court of +ndia oerturned the
(omba" 9i'h Court jud'ment and he$d that a artnershi #herein a minor is made a artner to the e7tent that he #as to be he$d ersona$$" $iab$e for $oses a$on' #ith hain' the ri'ht to ote and take art in the business cou$d not be re'istered b" the +ncome Ta7 4eartment. Moreoer2 in case the +ncome Ta7 Authorities re'ister the artnershi as one bein' on$" bet#een the adu$t artners2 #here in fact there are certain minor artners as #e$$2 a ne# contract is made #hich is substantia$$" different from the one bein' e7ecuted and hence the ori'ina$ contract cannot sa" to hae been a$id$" re'istered b" re'istration of this Ine#J contract. Therefore2 it is c$ear that the osition of the $a# is that a artnershi deed shou$d 7 [1950] 18 ITR 106 (All) 8[1952] 22 ITR 264 (Mad). 9 [1952] 22 ITR 285 (Mad) 10 [1958] 33 ITR 40 (a!na) 11 [1956] 29 ITR 903 ("#$) 12 AIR 1961 %& 680
c$ear$"
A$so2 a minorLs income under a artnershi cannot be brou'ht under the head of earnin'
income,- and hence cannot be considered for uroses of income ta7.,=
13 Narayan vs Commissioner of Income-Tax , 1976 102 ITR 748 &al. 14 AIR 1953 'n 270 (") 15 AIR 1966 %& 15. 16 AIR 1968 A**a$ 68 a* +!-d n %n/ 462 17 Adddepally v. Commissioner of Income-Tax , (1971) 79 ITR 396 a* +!-d n %T -*a (-*a), T/- a # ar!n-r*/p n Inda #l II, 224 (% -*a -d., 2009) 18 AIR 1968 A**a$ 68 a* +!-d n %n/ 462
/ights and Liabi&ities of the minor nder sub:section 2 a minor entit$ed to the benefits of a artnershi is besto#ed #ith the ri'ht to share the rofits as #e$$ as the roert"2 as ma" hae been decided at the time of minorLs admission to the benefits of the artnershi in 1uestion. 8urther2 the minor has the ri'ht to insect an" of the accounts of the firm. This access is ho#eer $imited to on$" the accounts and the minor does not hae the ri'ht to access other books such as those #hich ma" contain trade secrets. This $imitation to the ri'ht of the minor2 ho#eer seems commonsensica$ and e1uitab$e as the minor is not $iab$e to the e7tent to #hich the fu$$: f$ed'ed artners are $iab$e2 i.e.2 ersona$$". The minor a$so has the ri'ht to sue for benefits of the artnershi to #hich he is admitted./0 nder sub:section 2 the $iabi$it" of a minor #ho is entit$ed to benefits arisin' out of a artnershi is $imited #ith resect to that of a fu$$:f$ed'ed artner. Accordin' to the ho$din' in the Sanyasi Charan Mandal v. 4sutosh Ghose case/,2 the creditors of the firm can on$" roceed to the e7tent of minorLs interest in the firm but not ersona$$" a'ainst the minor. 9o#eer2 this rotection is not enjo"ed b" the fu$$:f$ed'ed artners of the firm #ho can be ersona$$" $iab$e #ith resect to the creditors. The osition of a minor 9indu in a joint fami$" trade is simi$ar a minor admitted to the benefits of a artnershi insofar as the former can a$so not be he$d ersona$$" $iab$e for the debts of the fami$" trade and on$" his share in the trade can be made $iab$e//. Thus2 it can be conc$uded that the osition of a minor 9indu in a joint fami$" trade is ana$o'ous to that of a minor #ho is entit$ed to the benefits of a artnershi. 9o#eer2 in cases #here members of fami$" carr" on a business2 there must be some ositie conduct on art of major members to sho# that the" intended to admit certain minors to the artnershi/B. +f the major member b" i'norance or error of $a# mistaken$" assume that the 19 .%. Naraana (Naraana), T/- a # ar!n-r*/p, 194 (2001) 20 A %n/, In!r#d'+!#n !# a # ar!n-r*/p 93 (2011) 21 AIR 1915 &al 482 22 %anka Krishna v. The Bank of Burma,IR (1912) 35 Mad 692 a* +!-d n %n/ 457 23 Venkatrama Iyer v. Balayya 97 ITR 730 r--rr-d n AIR 1985 -r 265 a! 273 a* +!-d n % Ad/ar, &#$$-n!-r #n T/- Indan ar!n-r*/p A+!, 1932 469 (2008)
minors #ere automatica$$" entit$ed to the benefits of such a artnershi2 the minor #ou$d not be entit$ed to the benefits under Section B0
inso$ent een in cases #here the other artners are adjud'ed inso$ent. nder sub:section 2 minorLs aforementioned ri'ht to sue for benefits of a artnershi to #hich he is entit$ed is $imited. The minor is entit$ed to sue for his share on$" #hi$e seerin' a$$ connections from the firm. The sub:section further $a"s do#n that the reso$ution is to be made in accordance #ith Section ?- as far as ossib$e. The roiso to this sub:section safe'uards the fu$$:f$ed'ed artners b" a$$o#in' them to conert a suit b" the minor for his share in the artnershi into one of disso$ution of the firm. The same ma" be done b" a$$ artners actin' to'ether or one artner #ho is entit$ed to disso$e the firm doin' so after 'iin' notice to the other artners. Re'ard$ess of the mode2 the share of the minor in such a suit is to be decided uon a$on' #ith those of the other artners. +n cases #here the disute is referred to arbitration2 the minor is as much a art" to the disute as the artners. +n cases #here the arbitration a'reement has not been si'ned b" the 'uardian of the minor on his beha$f2 the a'reement and
*osition of a minor on attaining ma7ority nder sub:section <@>2 the minor has an otion to either become a fu$$:f$ed'ed artner of the firm or seere his connections #ith the same. 9e ma"2 #ithin si7 months of attainin' ei'hteen "ears of a'e2 choose to become or not2 become a artner and si'nif" the same b" #a" of a ub$ic notice as described under Section /. 8ai$in' to do the same2 resu$ts in his is9o facto becomin' a artner in the firm. The minor need not issue a ub$ic notice in case he #ants to continue bein' a artner because he #ou$d an"#a"2 b" defau$t2 become a artner on the e7ir" of si7 months. The minor does continue to enjo" the ri'hts2 #hich he had enjo"ed as a minor2 after he turns into a major ti$$ he decides to either continue or reudiate the artnershi or the e7ir" of the eriod si7 months2 #hicheer is ear$ier /@. +f the minor did not hae the kno#$ed'e that he #as entit$ed to benefits of the artnershi2 he ma" si'nif" his #i$$ to 24 AIR 1965 %& 212. 25 %a/ara (%a/ara), Indan ar!n-r*/p and %al-* # :##d* A+!* 97 (2000)
reudiate the said contract #ithin si7 months of his attainin' kno#$ed'e of the fact that of he #as entit$ed to benefits of the artnershi in 1uestion. nder sub:section <>2 the burden of roin' that the minor did not hae kno#$ed'e that he #as in fact entit$ed to the benefits of artnershi rests #ith the art" assertin' the same. +f the erson assertin' so is the minor himse$f2 then he #ou$d hae the onus to roe the same in accordance #ith Section ,0 and if it is someone e$se then Section ,0, and Section ,0B #i$$ thro# the onus on him. nder sub:section <>2 c$ause 2 the minor2 #ho has either chosen to continue as a fu$$: f$ed'ed artner ost attainment of majorit" or fai$s to si'nif" his #i$$ to reudiate under sub: section <@>2 becomes a fu$$:f$ed'ed artner and such a minor can be he$d $iab$e for not on$" the debts incurred b" the artnershi after his becomin' a artner2 but a$so the ones #hich had been incurred eer since he #as entit$ed to benefits of the artnershi. Thus2 the minor in a #a" becomes retrosectie$" $iab$e. This is a major dearture from En'$ish *a#2 #herein the creditors are in a $ess faourab$e osition/. +n En'$ish *a#2 the minor #ou$d be $iab$e on$" for debts incurred b" the firm since he attained majorit"./ A minorLs share in the rofits2 on his joinin' the firm as a fu$$:f$ed'ed artner ost attainment of majorit"2 remains the same as #as set out in the deed/-. This is in $ine #ith the ie# taken in Bho5ilal v. Commissioner of Incometa!8)
Chandrakant $iab$e for the debts of a artnershi that had a$read" been disso$ed before he attained majorit". This estab$ishes that a minor #ho #as entit$ed to benefits of a artnershi cannot be he$d ersona$$" $iab$e for the debts of the firm #hen it had a$read" been disso$ed before he attained majorit"2 i.e.2 attained the caacit" to be a art" to $osses of the firm a$on' #ith rofits. nder sub:section <->2 the minor #ho e$ects not to be a artner his share in the firm #i$$ be $iab$e to the e7tent of $osses and debts incurred unti$ he 'ae ub$ic notice about his intention to seer his connections #ith the firm. 9e mi'ht thereafter brin' a suit to enforce this :uasi: contract $ike contract to receie his share. Sub:section <=> states that the t#o sub:sections #hich immediate$" recede sub:section <=> do not in an" #a" affect the ri'hts of the art" to #hom the minor after attainin' majorit" mi'ht hae misreresented himse$f as a artner. 9e #i$$ be $iab$e for Iho$din' outJ.
onc&usion A minor2 e7cet in some e7cetiona$ situations2 #i$$ not be $iab$e under the +ndian Contracts Act. Contracts b" a minor are oid or oidab$e. Simi$ar$" a minor cant be a artner of a artnershi2 he can on$" be admitted2 b" the artners of an" artnershi2 that to on$" for the benefits of the minor. A minor artner is not a fu$$ f$ed'ed artner2 he donLt hae an" 'reat ri'hts e7cet from the ri'ht to share of rofits. A minor #i$$ be 'ien a months ratification eriod just after he attains majorit"2 #ho uon ratification #ou$d become a com$ete artner of that artnershi. This is ca$$ed doctrine of Ratification.
Bib&iogra%hy +ndian Contract Act b" Atar Sin'h +ndian Partnershi and Sa$es of Goods Acts = b" 9; Sahara" S Adhikari2 Commenter" on The +ndian Partnershi Act2 ,=B/ ?= P.S. Nara"ana <Nara"anaL>2 The *a# of Partnershi2 ,=?