THE POSITION OF A PERSON OF UNSOUND MIND IN CONTRACT

 

THE POSITION OF A PERSON OF UNSOUND MIND

It has already been noted according to Section 11, only a person of sound mind is competent to contract. It means that if a person is of unsound mind, he is incompetent to contract just like a minor. He is not capable of transferring any property by a deed of gift, etc., and a transfer by him would be void ab initio (Section 12, para 2).

What is a sound mind for the purpose of making a valid contract has been defined by Section 12 as under:

"A person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract if, at the time when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his interests."

Soundness of mind is required only at the time of making a contract. It is possible that a person who is usually of unsound mind, but occasionally of sound mind, may make a contract when he is of sound mind. It means that even a person who is usually of unsound mind can make a contract during lucid intervals, i.e., at such intervals when he is of sound mind. Thus, a patient in a lunatic asylum, who is at intervals of sound mind, may contract during those intervals. a person who is usually of unsound mind can make a contract during lucid intervals, in the same way, a person who is Just as a usually of sound mind, but occasionally of unsound mind, may not make a contract when he is of unsound mind (Section 12, para 3) Thus, a sane man, who is delirious from fever or who is so drunk that he cannot understand the terms of a contract or form a rational judgment as to its effect on his interest cannot contract while such delirium or drunkenness lasts.

Unsound mind

It cannot be disputed that a contract of sale like any other contract would be vitiated if the consent of either party is given by a person of unsound mind as provided in Section 11 of the Contract Act. Under Section 12 of the Act, a person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making the contract, if at the time when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his interests. A person of unsound mind is thus not necessarily a lunatic. It is sufficient if the person is incapable of judging the consequences of his acts.

The relevant time when a person should be intelligent enough to form a rational judgment as regards the transaction is the time of making that transaction. If a person who is usually of unsound mind is proved to be having lucid intervals, he is capable of making a valid contract during such intervals. If such a person makes contract or executes a document, the burden of proving that at the time of such a transaction he was of unsound mind lies on the person who challenges the validity of the transaction.

In Indar Singh V, Parmeshwardhari Singh, AIR. 1957 Pat. 498, it has been held that " a person may to all appearances, behave in a normal fashion but, at the same time, he may be incapable of forming a judgmen of his own, as to whether the act he is about to do is to his interest or not, and to the contracts of such a person the law give protection."

In Chacko v. Mahadevan, A.LR. 2007 S.C. 2967 the appellant executed a sale deed of his land in favour of the respondent when he was suffering from alcoholic psychosis, the fact medically certified. The deed in question also showed that valuable land was sold at a very paltry amount. Referring to the Latin maxim "res ipsa loquitur" (i.e., the matter speaks for itself), the Apex Court set aside the sale, being by a person who was not of sound mind.

Onus to Prove Unsoundness: It is settled law that onus of proving unsoundness of mind of a person always rests upon him who alleges such state of mind of person.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

JOINT PROMISORS AND THE NATURE OF THEIR LIABILITY

  JOINT PROMISORS AND THE NATURE OF THEIR LIABILITY Sections 42, 43 and 44 of the Contract Act deal with the question of liability of the joint promisors. The following rules are contained in these Sections: The liability of the joint promisors is joint and several When two or more persons make a joint promise, the promisee may, in the absence of express agreement to the contrary, compel or more of such joint promisors to perform the whole of the promise. It depends on the discretion of the promisee as to which of the promisors are to be made liable for the whole of the promise. If one of the promisors is sued to meet the whole of the claim, he cannot say that as between different promisors, his liability is for a part of the promise only. For example, A, B and C jointly promise to pay D 3,000 rupees. D may compel either A or B or C to pay him 3,000 rupees. If two or more persons jointly take a lease, and their liability to pay the rent is joint and several under Section 43...
Read more
  List of Forms and Sections in Trademark Compiled by Ridhima Dixit ( https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/trademark-forms-india-per-rules-2007-riddhima-dixit/ )   As per the earlier provisions of law so prescribed under the Trademark Rules, 2002, there were 75 different kinds of forms for the various procedures relating to the trademark filing and registration. However, as per the proposed amendment, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry had issued the Trademark (Amendment) Rules, 2017. In the new set of rules, the number of forms were reduced to 8, to simplify and streamline the whole trademark filing and prosecution process. These forms are available online and are easy to access even by a layman, who does not have any knowledge on how to apply for a trademark protection. The purpose of each form is, thereby, very essential to be understood properly. 1.         TM- A  (‘Application for registration of a trademark’) This form...
Read more

CONTINGENT CONTRACTS

  CONTINGENT CONTRACTS What is a contingent contract According to Section 31, a contingent contract is a contract to do or not to do something, if some event, collateral to such contract, does not happen. When the contract is dependent or conditional upon the happening or non-happening of a certain future event, the contract is contingent. For example, A contracts to pay B Rs. 10,000 if B's house is burnt, this is a contingent contract. (Illustration to Section 31). The payment of the amount is contingent on the happening of a collateral event, i.e., the burning of the house. All contracts of insurance or indemnity aim at payment of money only after a certain event happens, or the loss is caused, and, therefore, they are contingent contracts. A wagering agreement is also a contingent contract, but that type of contingent contract has been specifically declared to be void by Section 30. A distinction is to be drawn between a contract under which a present obligation is created...
Read more