Privity of Contract. (contract law)

1. Tweddle v. Atkinson
2. Dunlop pneumatic tyre Co Ltd v. Selfridge. and company
3. Jamna Das v. Ram avtar
4. Klaus mittelbachert v. East India hotel ltd
5. Khwaja Muhammad khan v. Hussaini begum
6. Rose v. Joseph
7. Shuppu Ammal v. Subramaniyan
8. Devaraja urs v. Ram Krishniah

[@RohitKumar-bu9kc]

Best part of your lecture is that sir you discuss with landmark judgments. Thank you sir. And if possible do 2 lecture at least in a day

[@AmrikSingh-pm4ri]

Sir , I am immensely obliged to you 🙏Your way of teaching is awesome and you have also mounted my interest in the subject. Sir, I am a 1st year college student and failed to understand the lecture of my professor and also lacked my interest in this subject . But now I find it very easy and interesting too. A lots of thanks to you sir 🙏😊

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

Welcome g

[@akshittaneja4260]

Blessed to have you as a teacher ❤️

[@My_lyf99]

Very informative lecture

[@ramkumar-rc9xp]

Thanks sir you are best

[@anjalimadhar6336]

Thankyou sir tusi bhot vadiya padhonde ho and very informative. 🙏😊

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

Welcome g

[@himanshusaini1894]

First time i came here and your lecture impressed me with higher exceptions ...from book it is difficult to understand directly but you make it easily #ThnkYouSir

[@gauravbatra1753]

Excellent 👌

[@Rakesh-in8zk]

Thanks sir ji 😊

[@shubhamverma8541]

Your techique is mind bolwing.....

[@sohailsetia2235]

Yvery good becs cases the hai

[@cliked8325]

U r best I have ever heard Thanks for ur guidance...

[@legalworld2924]

thanku sir sir rose vs joseph ka case kahan ka tha

[@Adv_sahiba]

very good channel for judiciary prepration. thank you sir . and sir please make videos for constitution. its there in every states prelims exam. and also there are no lectures on youtube of contitution for judiciary prep. 🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

Will do after ipc

[@simerjeetsingh9994]

Very well explained lecture, sir

[@ProPakistani-r4t]

Good lecture

[@AdvDheerajChaudhary]

Sir Law Of Torts Bhi Upload Kiya Hai Apne..If Yes Plz Share Link plz.

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

Yet not, but will do

[@AdvDheerajChaudhary]

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 Okay Sir

[@sakshiaggarwal7588]

Thank you sir ☺

[@tanupriyabedi3010]

Thank u sooo much sir..aap thik ho gae..happy to see u😊

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

Thank you g

[@kumargaurav1385]

🙏🙏

[@farhanafaizan6021]

Sir ye jo exception of privity rule h. Kya ye exception english law me v follow hoga ya only in indian laws main?

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

Only in india

[@farhanafaizan6021]

Thank you sir

[@gargyyadav1874]

Thank u sir

[@geetanjalidas2673]

Sir, happy to see you are right, 😊. you didn't say anything about the case, "chenayya v. Ramayya"..?

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

I have discussed all the landmarks cases otherwise there are so many case laws on each section. Thank you

[@geetanjalidas2673]

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827, 😢😢😢sorry sir, I didn't mean to disrespect you, I got question on that case, so I asked... 😢😢

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

I was usually talking and never had an intention to hurt u, Sry even I didn't mean so. I respect all my students. 🙏🙏🙏

[@legalDynamics9929]

Sir, if the burden imposed on the third party, that should be with his consent plus the consent of the promisor As under the English law consent of the third person should be there....??? And whether it will come under privity of contract or tripartite contract???

[@200vaibhav1]

sir jamuna das v/s ram avtar is in contradiction to right of redemption in sec 60 & the case of covenants running with land it is governed by sec 39 tp act. please explain. why such contradiction, if we read sec. 60 with sec 98 of tp act third person can redeem.please answer

[@ashutosh9139]

Sir in acknowledgement case agar B ne C ko 2.5 lakh naa dia hta ar C poore 5 lakh k lie suit lata to kya use beneficiary me exception maana jaata..

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

I didn't get ur point, plz

[@neetu930]

sir pls explain the meaning of vice versa.....

[@ankitupadhyay0427]

@neetu kzbin.info/www/bejne/aHrKfpiFasuledU

[@videowithsongsandmotivatio4073]

Ldki dekh ke court beneficiary ko allow kar deti h aur yhi ldka hota to beneficiary ka exception kaha chla jaata h

[@PoojaGupta-nq3wj]

Thku so much sir😊 Sir plz give me one suggestion.. Which one is the best book regarding contract act

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

Avtar ki book best he

[@PoojaGupta-nq3wj]

Thku so much sir😊

[@khushigupta8200]

Sir, I have a query. In India we follow that the third party who is a beneficiary to the contract can sue. Sir, then how is the case of Khawaja Muhammad khan vs Husaini Begum an exceptional? Are these expectations according to English law? Waiting for your reply

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

PRIVITY OF CONTRACT= no 3rd party can sue upon a contract even if it made for his benefit. Applicable in Indian law applicable in English law but there are certain exceptions Jamna Das v Ram Avtar (1911) 30 I.A.7. ‘A’ had mortgaged some property to ‘X’. ‘A’ then sold that property to ‘B’ having agreed that ‘B’ would pay off the mortgaged debt to ‘X’. It was held that since there was no contract between ‘B’ and ‘X’, ‘B’ is not personally bound to pay the mortgage debt. Exceptions to privity of contract: (in Indian law) Trust: a trust is a property held and managed by one or more persons for another’s benefit. Eg: ‘A’ was appointed by his father as his successor and put in possession of estate. In consideration thereof ‘A’ agreed to pay a sum and to give a village to ‘B’ (illegitimate son of his father) on attaining his majority. Held that the trust was created in favour of B thus B is entitled to sue. Beneficiary: a person (beneficiary) in whose favour a charge or other in terest in some property is created may enforce it. Khwaja Muhammad Khan v Hussaini Begum (1910) 37 IA 152. There was an agreement between the father and father-in-law of ‘A’ that in consideration of her marriage with his son, he would pay to her Rs.500 per month for the betel-leaf expenses and some immovable property was charged for the payment of these expenses. In suit by ‘A’ for recovery of arrears, it was held that although she was not a party to the agreement, she was entitled to enforce her claim being the beneficiary.

[@khushigupta8200]

@@harpreetsinghkahlon2827 Thank you so much, sir🙏

[@harpreetsinghkahlon2827]

Welcome g