The Bank of Bengal vs Manna Lal

But we must admit the validity of the plea that the contract of mortgage is void under the provisions of Section 25 of the Contract Act. We do not quite understand the Judge''s argument as to the benefit which the appellant derived from the banking transaction. It does not appear that he had received any portion of the hundis when discounted; hut, assuming that he had done so, and admitting that under the circumstances he washable on the hundis, neither the antecedent benefit, nor the existing liability, nor the anticipated advantage to which the Judge alludes, would constitute a consideration as defined in, the Contract Act. To constitute a consideration as defined in that Act there must be an act, abstinence, or promise on the part of the promisee or some other person at the desire of the promisor. On the facts found there was no such act, abstinence, or promise, and therefore there was no consideration for the mortgage, and the contract is void. On this ground we must allow the appeal, and reversing the decrees of the Courts below so far as they decree the claim, we must dismiss the suit with costs.