Question

In which of the following cases it was decided that a contract with a minor is void?

• A. Carlill V. Carbolic Smokes Ball Co
• B. Chinnaih V. Ramaiah
• C. Mohori Bibee V. Dharmodas Ghose
• D. Harvey V. Facey

Hint:

Contracts with minors are void and unenforceable, as established in Mohori Bibee V. Dharmodas Ghose.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

Step 1: Understanding the Question.
In the case of Mohori Bibee V. Dharmodas Ghose, it was held that a contract with a minor is void, as a minor cannot legally enter into a binding contract. This decision affirmed the principle of voidability in contracts involving minors.
Step 2: Analysis of Options.
- (A) Carlill V. Carbolic Smokes Ball Co: This case is unrelated to contracts with minors.
- (B) Chinnaih V. Ramaiah: This case does not deal with the issue of contracts with minors.
- (C) Mohori Bibee V. Dharmodas Ghose: This is the landmark case that held a contract with a minor is void.
- (D) Harvey V. Facey: This case is related to an offer and acceptance, not contracts with minors.
Step 3: Conclusion.
Thus, the correct answer is (C) Mohori Bibee V. Dharmodas Ghose.