Abdul Aziz vs Masum Ali
📚 Abdul Aziz v. Masum Ali (1914) 36 All 268
🔹 Court:
Allahabad High Court
🔹 Citation:
(1914) 36 All 268
🔹 Background of the Case:
This is a landmark case under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, specifically dealing with the enforceability of promises made without consideration, especially in the context of charitable subscriptions.
🔹 Facts of the Case:
Masum Ali (defendant) had promised in writing to donate ₹500 to a fund for the rebuilding of a mosque.
Abdul Aziz (plaintiff), the secretary of the mosque committee, filed a suit to recover the promised amount.
However, no money had been paid, and no action had yet been taken to rebuild the mosque on the strength of this promise.
The suit was filed based solely on the promise made by the defendant.
🔹 Legal Issue:
Is a promise to pay a charitable donation enforceable under contract law when no consideration has been given in return?
Specifically: Does a bare promise (without consideration or reliance) create a binding contract?
🔹 Arguments:
Plaintiff’s Argument:
The promise was made in writing and should be enforceable.
The purpose was charitable, and the mosque committee was relying on the contributions.
Defendant’s Argument:
There was no consideration for the promise.
The mosque had not acted upon the promise — no construction or financial commitment had begun based on the pledge.
🔹 Judgment:
The Allahabad High Court dismissed the suit.
The court held that the promise was not enforceable because there was no consideration.
A bare promise to donate money, even in writing, does not amount to a binding contract under Section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act.
🔹 Legal Principle Established:
A contract without consideration is void unless it falls under the exceptions in Section 25 of the Indian Contract Act.
A mere promise to make a gift or donation does not amount to a contract unless:
It is supported by consideration, or
The promisee has altered his position by acting upon the promise (i.e., doctrine of promissory estoppel or detrimental reliance — which was not present here).
🔹 Important Quote from the Judgment:
"There was no consideration for the promise of the defendant. The plaintiff did not alter his position or incur any liability on the strength of the promise. Hence, the promise is not enforceable."
🔹 Significance of the Case:
✅ Clarifies that charitable subscriptions are not enforceable unless there is consideration or reliance.
❌ Even a written promise to donate is not a contract unless it fits the criteria under contract law.
📘 This case is often cited in academic and professional discussions on consideration, gratuitous promises, and charitable obligations.
🔹 Comparative Reference:
This case is often compared with:
Kedar Nath v. Gauri Mohamed (1886): In that case, the court upheld the promise to donate because the plaintiff had started construction based on the promise, showing detrimental reliance. That case was enforceable; Abdul Aziz v. Masum Ali was not, due to lack of such reliance.
✅ Conclusion:
Abdul Aziz v. Masum Ali remains a foundational judgment in Indian contract law for understanding the principle that a promise to pay a donation, without consideration or reliance, is not enforceable. It draws a clear line between moral obligations and legally binding contracts.
RELATED Blog
0 comments