Doraswami Iyer v. Arunachala Ayyar (1936) — Consideration & Temple Repair Subscriptions

Temple trustees started repairs. Funds ran short, so villagers subscribed. One subscriber promised ₹125 but did not pay. The question: did trustees’ repair work amount to consideration for his promise? The Court treated action taken in reliance on the promise, giving the promisor a practical benefit, as enough to support enforceability under Section 2(d) ICA.

• More than a bare promise is needed—there must be a bargain or benefit.
• Trustees’ repairs and efforts can count as consideration when linked to the promise.

1. Do the trustees’ repair works, undertaken after the promise, qualify as consideration?

• Section 2(d), ICA: Consideration is an act, abstinence, or promise done at the promisor’s desire, or a benefit to the promisor, or a detriment to the promisee.
• There must be a bargain—something more than a bare promise to donate.

The Court held that a promise may be enforceable where the promisor gains a practical benefit and the promisee acts on the faith of it. Here, the trustees’ repair effort linked to the promise supplied consideration. Recovery of the pledged amount was allowed.

• Section 2(d) ICA requires more than a bare promise: there must be a bargain/benefit/detriment.
• Acts done in reliance on a promise may constitute consideration when connected to the promisor’s desire or benefit.

The case helps students see when subscriptions or pledges become binding promises. It clarifies how consideration works for public or community projects like temple repairs.

Mnemonic: “BAR” — Bargain • Action • Reliance

1. Bargain: Promise must tie to a benefit/detriment.
2. Action: Promisee does work or incurs expense.
3. Reliance: The action is because of the promise.

Consideration

Something of value given or done in exchange for a promise (benefit/detriment).

Bare Promise

A promise with no exchange—normally not enforceable.

Practical Benefit

A real-world advantage the promisor gets, even if not money.