Cpt law problem
Vibhor Nanda (CA student) (59 Points)
14 June 2012Vibhor Nanda (CA student) (59 Points)
14 June 2012
Tejaswi Kasturi
(student-cpt)
(427 Points)
Replied 14 June 2012
1. void as illegal as opposed to public policy.
2.C gets good title exception to "Nemo dat quod non habet" section 30(1)
Vibhor Nanda
(CA student)
(59 Points)
Replied 14 June 2012
Mayank Mall
(CA-Final)
(316 Points)
Replied 14 June 2012
Tejaswi Kasturi
(student-cpt)
(427 Points)
Replied 14 June 2012
yeah That is what I would also think when first looking at the question. But the law has to protect the rights of the C who bought the T.v. on good faith from B without knowing that it is already sold. It is given in the book as an exception to the rule that you can't give what you don't have. This is mentioned as section 31. A's recourse is to either sue B as breach of contract and claim damages and rescind the contract to get the money back or to claim specific performance. i.e. to get a similar T.v. for the pre-agreed price
Tejaswi Kasturi
(student-cpt)
(427 Points)
Replied 14 June 2012
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/904169/
CHAPTER IV PERFORMANCE OF THE CONTRACT CHAPTER IV PERFORMANCE OF THE CONTRACT
the law gives good title to C
Vibhor Nanda
(CA student)
(59 Points)
Replied 14 June 2012
CA Nitin Gupta
(Senior Accounts Officer at JK Group of Industries + ca-cpt ipcc coaching)
(97 Points)
Replied 18 June 2012
TEJASWI IS RIGHT..BINGO