ORDER OF REFERENCE

BHIMASANKARAM, J. :- This appeal raises the question as to whether an agreement to sell by the guardian of a Hindu minor is specifically enforceable against the minor. Two decisions of the Privy Council have been referred to by the learned counsel as bearing on the point; viz., - Mir Sarwarajan v. Fakhruddin Mohammad, 39 Cal 232 (PC) (A) and - Subrahmanyam v. Subbarao, AIR 1948 PC 95 (B). The earlier case laid down that it was not within the competence of the guardian of a minor to bind the minor or his estate by a contract to purchase immovable property and that such a contract was not enforceable by either party for want of mutuality.

The principle of this case was applied by a Full Bench of the Madras High Court in - Venkatachalam Pillai v. Sethuram Rao, AIR 1933 Mad 322 (C) in the case of a Hindu minor seeking to - enforce an agreement in his favour for the resale of a property which had been alienated by his guardian and it has been uniformly held in that Court that no decree for specific performance could be passed in favour of or against a minor on the basis of a contract either for sale or purchase of immoveable property entered into on his behalf