send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Type your modal answer and submitt for approval
Principle: A Contract can not be enforced by or against a person who is not a party to it. However, where some benefit is conferred on third party by the contract itself, there third party can be allowed to enforce that contract to get such benefit.
Facts: Dinesh is liable to pay Rs. 50000/- to Suresh. In order to discharge this liability Dinesh enters into a contract with Ramesh by which Dinesh sells his car to Ramesh for Rs. 1 lac. Ramesh takes the delivery of the car and promises/ assures to pay its price at the earliest. Dinesh separately informs Suresh about this contract for his satisfaction. Ramesh fails to pay the car’s price. Suresh wants to join Dinesh in filing suit against Ramesh for the recovery of price of the car. Whether Suresh is entitled to do so?
Suresh is entitled to do so because the contract was made for his benefit.
Suresh is entitled to do so because Dinesh is liable to him and discharge of this liability depends upon the payment of the price of the car by Ramesh.
Suresh is not entitled to do so because liability of Dinesh does not depand upon any assurance of Ramesh
Suresh is not entitled to do because he is not a party to the contract between Dinesh and Ramesh.
The facts seem to be insufficient because it is not clear whether Suresh was the third party to the contract or not. He was merely being assured by Dinesh that his profit from the contract would be used to repay his debt. However, if we assume Suresh to be the third party, then option "4" would be the most appropriate.
By: SANAT DATT BHARDWAJ ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses