Skip to content

CMA Foundation · Fundamentals of Business Laws and Business Communication · Consideration and Legality of Object

Kiran agrees to pay Suresh Rs 50,000 for two things: (i) delivering 100 bags of rice, which is lawful, and (ii) dropping a prosecution for robbery that Suresh has instituted against Kiran. Which statement is correct under Section 24?

The agreement is void because part of the consideration is unlawful. Agreeing to drop a prosecution for robbery is an unlawful object, and Section 24 makes the entire agreement void if any part of the consideration is unlawful. The lawful rice delivery cannot be enforced separately.

  1. ASuresh can enforce the rice delivery part only
  2. BThe agreement is void because part of the consideration is unlawfulCorrect
  3. CThe agreement is valid because the major part is lawful
  4. DThe agreement is voidable at Kiran's option

Explanation

Dropping a prosecution for robbery is an unlawful object under Section 23, as in its illustration (h). Because that unlawful part is joined with a lawful one in a single agreement, Section 24 makes the whole agreement void. The size of the lawful part is irrelevant, so the majority argument fails.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Consideration and Legality of Object shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Consideration and Legality of ObjectFree diagnostic mock

More Consideration and Legality of Object questions