Abdul Hameed V. Peer Cando Et Al.,

Present: Lascelles C.J. and Middleton J.

ABDUL HAMEED v. PEER CANDO et al.

306-D. C. Colombo, 32,183.

Marriage brokage-Agreement by a father to give his daughter in marriage to another and to pay damages in default-Legality.

An agreement whereby defendant covenanted to give his daughter in marriage to the plaintiff within six months, and in case of default to pay a sum of Rs. 1,000 to the plaintiff by way of liquidated damages, was held not to be an illegal contract.

Middleton J.-It is certainly not wrong or illegal for a parent to influence his daughter on the subject of marriage, and the presumption would be that such influence was used for her benefit by a person more experienced than herself, and where an agreement has been made apparently with the consent of both daughter and parent that she should marry some one, I can see no evil or illegality in the parent rendering himself responsible in damages if the daughter declines to keep her promise.

Lascells C.J.-The agreement now sued on is essentially different from a marriage brokage contract, where one of the parties, in consideration of some benefit to herself, engages to p

Click Here to Read the rest of this document