Legal Word Of The Day

“Implied Contract”

Such a contract as the law presumes a man to have promised to perform.
The word ‘implied’ may be more appropriate to contracts implied by law, but it is sometimes used to designate what may be called tacit contracts, that is, contracts where the proposal or the acceptance or both are signified, not by words, but by acts or conduct. But before there can be such a tacit or implied contract, the acts or the conduct relied upon must be of such nature that it can only give rise to the inference that there must have been an implied offer and acceptance.

An express contract is one to which the minds of the parties have assented, while implied contracts are those implied by law from the facts and circumstances of the transaction, although they are even against the consent of the party to be bound. The distinction between an express contract and an implied one is that in one the liability arises directly from the contract, while in the other the contract is implied, or arises from the liability.

CHEATING AND USING FORGED DOCUMENTS

Compounding of Offence– Accused convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for One year and pay fine entire amount involved in case deposited by accused — incident 23years old imprisonment to period already undergone but on condition of paying additional fine of Rs. 1 lakh.

[ 2012 AIR SCW 3775(from Bombay)

DALVEER BHANDARI & DEEPAK VERMA, JJ CRIMINAL APPEAL. No. 631/2011 (arising out of S.L.P(Cri) No. 8236/2008/D/- 28-02-2011.

Ghanshyam

v.

State Of Maharashtra.

Advocate — Gita Chakravarthy.

CAN A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT BE WAIVED?

No, There is no such ruling on this point.

The fundamental rights are enforceable to protect individual from unjust treatment by the State. However, if the affected person wants to remain silent about the injustice one is getting from the State, then another person who may not be a locus standi in the case can approach the court for the enforcement of the fundamental rights of the affected person.

Sunil Batra

v.

Delhi Adminstration.

Thus, in effect, the fundamental right cannot be waived by the affected person, as that remain enforceable at behest of another person.

In Bashesharnath

v.

I.T. Commission. AIR (1959) SC 149 it was held that an individual can not waive fundamental Right.

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

seven − 1 =