List of Current Affairs

Source: Patna High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Patna High Court in the matter of Urmila Devi Jain & Ors v. Ashok Kumar & Ors., has held that as per the provisions of Section 31 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (ICA) a sale agreement with a contingency clause cannot be enforced unless that contingency is fulfilled.

What is the Background of Urmila Devi Jain & Ors v. Ashok Kumar & Ors. Case?

• The plaintiffs filed a suit for a decree of specific performance of contract on the basis of an agreement for sale executed by defendant.
• The plaintiffs sought relief for a decree of a specific performance of contract in respect of the suit property.
• The plaintiff contended that the property originally owned by Shambhu Ram was later transferred to the Respondents through a registered Will after his demise.
• The trial court rejected the plaint under the provisions of Order 7 Rule 11 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC).
• Thereafter, an appeal has been filed before the High Court of Patna which was later dismissed.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Justice Khatim Reza observed that unless that contingency was fulfilled, the contract was not capable of enforcement as stated in Section 31 of the ICA.
• The Court held that the agreement to sale was not a conclusive contract. The performance of it was certainly contingent upon such decision being available in favor of the defendants.
• It was further held that as per the findings of the learned trial court, the plaint being hit by provisions of Section 31 and 32 of the ICA, would not carry forward the case of the appellants as, in any case, the plaint deserved to be outrightly rejected.

What are the Relevant Legal Provisions Involved in it?

Section 31 of ICA

About:

• This section defines contingent contract.
• It states that a contingent contract is a contract to do or not to do something, if some event, collateral to such contract, does or does not happen.

Illustration:

• A contracts to pay B Rs. 10,000 if B’s house is burnt. This is a contingent contract.

Essentials of Contingent Contract:

• There must be a contract between the parties.
• The contract must be to do or not to do something.
• The performance of the contract depends upon the happening or not happening of some future event.
• The happening of event must be uncertain at the time of the agreement.
• If the event becomes impossible, the contract will become a void contract.

Case Law:

• In Chandulal Harjivandas v. CIT (1967), it was held by the Supreme Court that all contracts of insurance and indemnity are contingent.

Section 32 of ICA

About:

• This section deals with the enforcement of contracts contingent on an event happening.
• It states that the contingent contracts to do or not to do anything if an uncertain future event happens cannot be enforced by law unless and until that event has happened. If the event becomes impossible, such contracts become void.

Illustration:

• A makes a contract with B to buy B’s horse if A survives C. This contract cannot be enforced by law unless and until C dies in A’ s lifetime.

Source: Calcutta High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Calcutta High Court in the matter of Fabian Ricklin, alias Ranabir Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. has held that the right to privacy of a biological parent would prevail over the right of the child to conduct a root search to trace his origins.

What is the Background of Fabian Ricklin, alias Ranabir Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. Case?

• In this case, a Swiss citizen (petitioner) filed a plea before the High Court of Kerala to trace his biological origins by seeking the relinquishment deed which was executed by the adoption agency that facilitated his adoption.
• The petitioner's mother, an unmarried woman, had given him up for adoption in 1988 and that she did not wish to maintain any connection with the child, and went untraceable shortly after he was adopted by his Swiss adoptive parents.
• The High Court dismissed the plea.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The Single Bench comprising of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya observed that right to privacy of a biological parent, especially an unwed mother who gave up her child for adoption and subsequently went untraceable, would prevail over the right of the child to conduct a root search to trace his origins.
• The Court also held that Section 47 of the Adoption Regulations, 2022 clearly stipulates that the right of an adopted child shall not infringe the right to privacy of the biological parents.
• It was further added that the right to know one's roots is definitely implicit in one's existence as a human being. At the level of the individual, the same translates to leading a life worth the name. However, as against the right to know one's roots, the rights of privacy and protection of identity of the biological parents of an adoptee are more fundamental and basic insofar as the said right protects the very survival of the biological parents.

What are the Relevant Legal Provisions Involved in it?

Right to Privacy

• Right to Privacy is regarded as one of the most crucial human rights in the contemporary day.
• Right to privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI).
  • Privacy postulates the reservation of a private space for the individual, described as the right to be let alone. The concept is founded on the autonomy of the individual.
• In K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017), the Supreme Court held that Privacy constitutes the foundation of all liberty because it is in privacy that the individual can decide how liberty is best exercised. Individual dignity and privacy are inextricably linked in a pattern woven out of a thread of diversity into the fabric of a plural culture.

Adoption Regulations, 2022

• This Regulation was introduced by the Ministry of Women and Child Development for the purpose of streamlining the adoption process.
• Section 47 of this Regulation deals with root search. It states that

(1) If the biological parents, at the time of surrender of the child, have specifically requested anonymity, then the consent in writing of the biological parents shall be taken by the Specialized Adoption Agency or the District Child Protection Unit, as the case may be, before divulging information.

(2) In cases of root search by older adoptees, the agencies or authorities concerned that is Authorized Foreign Adoption Agency, Central Authority, Indian diplomatic mission, Authority, State Adoption Resource Agency or District Child Protection Unit or Specialized Adoption Agency, whenever contacted by any adoptee, shall facilitate their root search.

(3) Persons above eighteen years can apply independently online while children below eighteen years shall apply jointly with their adoptive parents to the Authority seeking facilitation of root search.

(4) In case of denial by the biological parents or non-traceability of the parents in surrendered cases, the reasons and the circumstances under which the information is not being made available shall be disclosed to the adoptee.

(5) A root search by a third party shall not be permitted and the agencies or authorities concerned shall not make any information public relating to biological parents, adoptive parents or adopted child.

(6) The right of an adopted child shall not infringe the right to privacy of the biological parents.