Charanjit Singh v. Chattranjan Pal — Section 12 ICA (Unsound Mind)
Was the 29 April 1999 sale deed valid when the seller was of unsound mind? This page explains the case in simple, classroom-style English.
```
Table of Contents
Quick Summary
The plaintiff (through his brother) said he was of unsound mind and asked the court to declare a sale deed dated 29 April 1999 as null and void. The defendant said he became owner through that deed and that the plaintiff’s father had consented. The trial court found the plaintiff incapable of contracting and decreed in his favour (4 Aug 2009). The first appeal failed (6 Aug 2011). In the second appeal, the High Court again sided with the plaintiff and dismissed the appeal.
Issues
- Is the sale deed dated 29 April 1999 illegal and void?
- Did the plaintiff lack capacity under Section 12, Indian Contract Act at the time of execution?
Rules
Section 12, ICA
A person is of unsound mind if, at the time of the contract, they cannot understand it or form a rational judgment about its effect on their interests.
Effect
A contract made by such a person at that time is void. Third-party presence (e.g., a parent) does not cure lack of capacity.
Facts (Timeline)
Arguments
Appellant (Defendant)
- Valid sale for Rs. 1,54,000; executed with father’s consent.
- Deed should not be set aside; plaintiff capable enough to sign.
Respondent (Plaintiff)
- Plaintiff was of unsound mind at execution; no rational judgment possible.
- Medical expert confirms incapacity (40% disability).
- Deed is void; needs declaration and protection.
Judgment
Held: Second appeal dismissed. The High Court upheld that the plaintiff was of unsound mind and could not form a rational judgment at the time of the deed. The deed is invalid.
Note: The father’s presence/consent did not validate the deed.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 12 ICA, capacity is judged at the moment of contracting. If the person cannot understand the transaction or judge its effect, the contract is void. Third-party consent cannot replace the contracting party’s capacity.
Why It Matters
- Shows how courts use medical evidence to decide capacity.
- Confirms that capacity is personal; others’ consent cannot cure it.
- Helps in property and contract disputes where mental health is in question.
Key Takeaways
- Capacity test = time-specific (at execution).
- Medical proof matters; here it showed lack of rational judgment.
- Third-party consent does not fix incapacity.
Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook
Mnemonic: “Mind, Moment, Meaning.”
- Mind: Was the person sound?
- Moment: At the time of signing.
- Meaning: Could they understand and judge the deal?
IRAC Outline
Issue
Is the 29 Apr 1999 sale deed void due to the plaintiff’s unsound mind?
Rule
Section 12 ICA: incapacity at the time → contract void; others’ consent doesn’t cure it.
Application
Doctor’s testimony showed 40% disability and no rational judgment at execution.
Conclusion
Deed invalid; trial decree sustained; second appeal dismissed.
Glossary
- Unsound Mind
- A state where a person cannot understand a contract or judge its impact on their interests.
- Declaration
- A court’s formal statement of legal status—e.g., that a deed is void.
- Specific Performance
- Order to perform a contract; usually not granted if the contract itself is void.
FAQs
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now