Question

According to the Indian law in a lawful contract, consideration

• A. Must move from promisee only
• B. May move from promisee or any other person
• C. is not necessary at all
• D. None of the above

Hint:

Remember the key difference: \textbf{English Law} = "Privity of Consideration" (consideration must move from the promisee). \textbf{Indian Law} = No privity of consideration (it can move from "any other person"). This is a fundamental distinction.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question asks about the rule of consideration in Indian contract law, specifically concerning who can provide the consideration. This is a point where Indian law differs from English law.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The rule is derived from the definition of 'consideration' in Section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The definition states: "When, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee or any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise". The key phrase here is "promisee or any other person." This means that under Indian law, consideration does not necessarily have to come from the promisee; it can be provided by a third party (a stranger to the consideration). \begin{itemize} \item (A) Must move from promisee only: This is the established rule in English Law. It is incorrect for India. \item (B) May move from promisee or any other person: This is the correct position under Indian Law, as established by Section 2(d) and affirmed in cases like \textit{Chinnaya v. Ramayya}. \end{itemize}
Step 3: Final Answer:
According to Indian law, consideration May move from promisee or any other person.