1. This appeal raises a short and interesting question as to the construction and legality of a contract. The respondent, who was the defendant in the suit, contended that the contract dated 19-3-1948, on which the plaintiff filed the suit was void by reason of the provisions of the Bombay Securities Contracts Control Act, Act 8 of 1925. The learned Judge accepted that contention and dismissed the suit.

2. The inclination of every Court must be in favour of validating rather than avoiding a contract, and when a law makes a contract void the Court must strictly construe the provisions of that law. The contract came to be entered into under the following circumstances. One Pillani wanted to convert the International Bank of India, Ltd., into a finance corporation and he wanted the sanction of the District Court for the purpose, and he wanted the co-operation of the plaintiff in this behalf and the defendant was asked to approach the plaintiff to give his assistance.

The plaintiff agreed to give his assistance, and as the plaintiff was the holder of 1000 ordinary shares of the International Bank of India, the agreement in suit was arrived at and the operative part of the agreeme