SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

STEVEN APPUHAMY V. DOTTY


STEVEN APPUHAMY

STEVEN APPUHAMY
V.
DOTTY

COURT OF APPEAL
SRISKANDARAJAH.J.
UPALY ABEYRATHNE.J.
CA 631/99(F)
DC GAMPAHA 33489/L

Minor-Execution of Deed - Contract of minors - Prescription - 3 years - Fraud alleged - When does prescription commence to run against a minor? -Cause of action? - Unassisted contracts?

The plaintiff - respondent instituted action seeking an order to invalidate the transfer deed, denying her execution of the deed alleged that she was 17 years old at the time of attestation of the alleged deed of transfer

The defendant - appellant contended that the deed has been duly registered and the respondent's action is prescribed in law. The District Court held with the plaintiff.

HELD:

(1) Under the existing law, failure by a minor within three years of the attainment of majority to institute action for the avoidance of his contract would debar him from seeking this relief thereafter.

(2) When elements of fraud exist where such circumstances are not within the knowledge of the minor who obtained majority, then the cause of action would accrue to the minor within three years from the time he came to know about the alleged fraudulent act.

Per Upa















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top