{"id":5374,"date":"2025-04-13T16:07:40","date_gmt":"2025-04-13T10:37:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/?p=5374"},"modified":"2025-04-20T14:39:09","modified_gmt":"2025-04-20T09:09:09","slug":"durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/","title":{"rendered":"Durga Prasad v. Baldeo 1880 (Case Summary)"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t<div data-elementor-type=\"wp-post\" data-elementor-id=\"5374\" class=\"elementor elementor-5374\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<section class=\"elementor-section elementor-top-section elementor-element elementor-element-2ae53584 elementor-section-full_width elementor-section-height-default elementor-section-height-default wpr-particle-no wpr-jarallax-no wpr-parallax-no wpr-sticky-section-no\" data-id=\"2ae53584\" data-element_type=\"section\" data-e-type=\"section\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-container elementor-column-gap-default\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-column elementor-col-100 elementor-top-column elementor-element elementor-element-589718ce\" data-id=\"589718ce\" data-element_type=\"column\" data-e-type=\"column\">\n\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-wrap elementor-element-populated\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-762b0dd9 elementor-widget elementor-widget-heading\" data-id=\"762b0dd9\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-e-type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"heading.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<h1 class=\"elementor-heading-title elementor-size-default\">Durga Prasad v. Baldeo 1880 (Case Summary)<\/h1>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-318ff0c2 elementor-widget elementor-widget-image\" data-id=\"318ff0c2\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-e-type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"image.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1536\" height=\"864\" src=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Fawyerz-9-1536x864.png\" class=\"attachment-1536x1536 size-1536x1536 wp-image-5382\" alt=\"Durga Prasad v. Baldeo 1880\" srcset=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Fawyerz-9-1536x864.png 1536w, https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Fawyerz-9-300x169.png 300w, https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Fawyerz-9-1024x576.png 1024w, https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Fawyerz-9-150x84.png 150w, https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Fawyerz-9-768x432.png 768w, https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/Fawyerz-9.png 1920w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 1536px) 100vw, 1536px\" title=\"\">\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-6abb6672 elementor-grid-0 elementor-widget elementor-widget-wpr-sharing-buttons\" data-id=\"6abb6672\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-e-type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"wpr-sharing-buttons.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"wpr-sharing-buttons elementor-grid wpr-sharing-official wpr-sharing-label-off wpr-sharing-label-tr\"><div class=\"elementor-grid-item\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/\" class=\"wpr-sharing-icon wpr-sharing-facebook-f\" title=\"\" target=\"_blank\"><i class=\"fab fa-facebook-f\"><\/i><\/a><\/div><div class=\"elementor-grid-item\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/&title=Durga Prasad v. Baldeo 1880 (Case Summary)&summary=This case established the principle that in restitution claims, a plaintiff can recover only for services rendered for the benefit of the defendant, not for services rendered at the request of a third party. \n&source=https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/\" class=\"wpr-sharing-icon wpr-sharing-linkedin-in\" title=\"\" target=\"_blank\"><i class=\"fab fa-linkedin-in\"><\/i><\/a><\/div><div class=\"elementor-grid-item\"><a href=\"mailto:?subject=Durga Prasad v. Baldeo 1880 (Case Summary)&body=https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/\" class=\"wpr-sharing-icon wpr-sharing-envelope\" title=\"\" target=\"_blank\"><i class=\"fas fa-envelope\"><\/i><\/a><\/div><div class=\"elementor-grid-item\"><a href=\"https:\/\/api.whatsapp.com\/send?text=*Durga Prasad v. Baldeo 1880 (Case Summary)*%0ahttps:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/\" class=\"wpr-sharing-icon wpr-sharing-whatsapp\" title=\"\" target=\"_blank\"><i class=\"fab fa-whatsapp\"><\/i><\/a><\/div><\/div>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-element elementor-element-6511c64e elementor-widget elementor-widget-text-editor\" data-id=\"6511c64e\" data-element_type=\"widget\" data-e-type=\"widget\" data-widget_type=\"text-editor.default\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"elementor-widget-container\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">This case established the principle that in restitution claims, a plaintiff can recover only for services rendered for the benefit of the defendant, not for services rendered at the request of a third party. The Allahabad High Court also examined the necessity of consideration in contract formation under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.<\/span><\/p><div id=\"ez-toc-container\" class=\"ez-toc-v2_0_82_2 ez-toc-wrap-left counter-hierarchy ez-toc-counter ez-toc-custom ez-toc-container-direction\">\n<div class=\"ez-toc-title-container\">\n<p class=\"ez-toc-title\" style=\"cursor:inherit\">Table of Contents<\/p>\n<span class=\"ez-toc-title-toggle\"><a href=\"#\" class=\"ez-toc-pull-right ez-toc-btn ez-toc-btn-xs ez-toc-btn-default ez-toc-toggle\" aria-label=\"Toggle Table of Content\"><span class=\"ez-toc-js-icon-con\"><span class=\"\"><span class=\"eztoc-hide\" style=\"display:none;\">Toggle<\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-icon-toggle-span\"><svg style=\"fill: #000000;color:#000000\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" class=\"list-377408\" width=\"20px\" height=\"20px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" fill=\"none\"><path d=\"M6 6H4v2h2V6zm14 0H8v2h12V6zM4 11h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2zM4 16h2v2H4v-2zm16 0H8v2h12v-2z\" fill=\"currentColor\"><\/path><\/svg><svg style=\"fill: #000000;color:#000000\" class=\"arrow-unsorted-368013\" xmlns=\"http:\/\/www.w3.org\/2000\/svg\" width=\"10px\" height=\"10px\" viewBox=\"0 0 24 24\" version=\"1.2\" baseProfile=\"tiny\"><path d=\"M18.2 9.3l-6.2-6.3-6.2 6.3c-.2.2-.3.4-.3.7s.1.5.3.7c.2.2.4.3.7.3h11c.3 0 .5-.1.7-.3.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7zM5.8 14.7l6.2 6.3 6.2-6.3c.2-.2.3-.5.3-.7s-.1-.5-.3-.7c-.2-.2-.4-.3-.7-.3h-11c-.3 0-.5.1-.7.3-.2.2-.3.5-.3.7s.1.5.3.7z\"\/><\/svg><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/span><\/div>\n<nav><ul class='ez-toc-list ez-toc-list-level-1 ' ><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-1\" href=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/#Facts_of_Durga_Prasad_v_Baldeo\" >Facts of Durga Prasad v. Baldeo<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-2\" href=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/#Issues_framed\" >Issues framed<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-3\" href=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/#Subordinate_Court_Judgment\" >Subordinate Court Judgment<\/a><\/li><li class='ez-toc-page-1 ez-toc-heading-level-2'><a class=\"ez-toc-link ez-toc-heading-4\" href=\"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/contract-law\/durga-prasad-v-baldeo-1880-case-summary\/#Judgment_of_Durga_Prasad_v_Baldeo\" >Judgment of Durga Prasad v. Baldeo<\/a><\/li><\/ul><\/nav><\/div>\n<h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Facts_of_Durga_Prasad_v_Baldeo\"><\/span><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><b>Facts of Durga Prasad v. Baldeo<\/b><\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><ol><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The plaintiff, Durga Prasad, in 1862, constructed a grain market named Hume Ganj in Etawah, at the Collector&#8217;s request, Durga Prasad (the plaintiff) constructed shops and facilitated the establishment of the market at his own expense.<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The defendants, Baldeo and others, used the marketplace for their commercial purposes and benefitted from the infrastructure provided.<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Durga Prasad sought restitution, claiming reimbursement from the defendants for the expenses incurred in constructing the marketplace.<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Subsequently, Durga Prasad sought compensation from the shop occupiers, claiming a right to a commission based on his efforts in establishing the market.<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">To resolve ongoing disputes, the Municipal Committee suggested that Durga Prasad formalize an agreement with the shop occupiers.<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">An agreement dated June 22, 1875, was produced, purportedly executed by the occupiers, agreeing to pay Durga Prasad six annas of the percentage received by the occupiers.<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Registration of this agreement was refused, as many occupiers denied executing it, and allegations of forgery arose.<\/span><\/li><\/ol><h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Issues_framed\"><\/span><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><b>Issues framed<\/b><\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><ol><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Whether a plaintiff recovers compensation for expenses incurred at the request of a third party if the defendant benefits from them?<\/span><\/li><li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Whether the law of restitution applies when the defendant has not explicitly requested or agreed to pay for the services?<\/span><\/li><\/ol><h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Subordinate_Court_Judgment\"><\/span><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><b>Subordinate Court Judgment<\/b><\/span><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Court of First Instance ruled in favor of the plaintiff, Durga Prasad.It concluded that the diligence and expenses incurred by the plaintiff constitute valid consideration for the agreement, thereby entitling him to a portion of the fees collected from the market&#8217;s occupants. However, upon appeal, the Lower Appellate Court overturned this decision. It determined that the plaintiff&#8217;s actions were undertaken to satisfy the Collector&#8217;s desires, not at the behest of the defendants (the shop occupants). Consequently, the court found that there was no valid consideration.\u00a0<\/span><\/p><h2><span class=\"ez-toc-section\" id=\"Judgment_of_Durga_Prasad_v_Baldeo\"><\/span><span style=\"color: #993300;\"><b>Judgment of Durga Prasad v. Baldeo<\/b><\/span><b><\/b><span class=\"ez-toc-section-end\"><\/span><\/h2><p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Allahabad High Court applied principles of restitution(restoration of wrongful claims) and an agreement to be enforceable as a contract, it must be supported by consideration, which, under Section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, is defined as an act done at the desire of the promisor.<\/span><\/p><p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u00a0The Allahabad High Court held that for restitution to apply, there must be an express or implied request from the defendant for the plaintiff\u2019s services. In this case, the defendants did not request the construction of the marketplace, nor did they promise to compensate the plaintiff. The benefit derived by the defendants was incidental and did not obligate them to pay for the construction costs.<\/span><\/p><p><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Allahabad High Court ruled in favor of the defendants, holding that they were not liable to reimburse Durga Prasad.The principle of restitution cannot apply where the benefit conferred on the defendant is incidental and not requested.<\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/section>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This case established the principle that in restitution claims, a plaintiff can recover only for services rendered for the benefit of the defendant, not for services rendered at the request of a third party. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":5382,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"site-sidebar-layout":"default","site-content-layout":"","ast-site-content-layout":"default","site-content-style":"default","site-sidebar-style":"default","ast-global-header-display":"","ast-banner-title-visibility":"","ast-main-header-display":"","ast-hfb-above-header-display":"","ast-hfb-below-header-display":"","ast-hfb-mobile-header-display":"","site-post-title":"","ast-breadcrumbs-content":"","ast-featured-img":"","footer-sml-layout":"","ast-disable-related-posts":"","theme-transparent-header-meta":"","adv-header-id-meta":"","stick-header-meta":"","header-above-stick-meta":"","header-main-stick-meta":"","header-below-stick-meta":"","astra-migrate-meta-layouts":"default","ast-page-background-enabled":"default","ast-page-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-4)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"ast-content-background-meta":{"desktop":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"tablet":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""},"mobile":{"background-color":"var(--ast-global-color-5)","background-image":"","background-repeat":"repeat","background-position":"center center","background-size":"auto","background-attachment":"scroll","background-type":"","background-media":"","overlay-type":"","overlay-color":"","overlay-opacity":"","overlay-gradient":""}},"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[3],"tags":[96],"class_list":["post-5374","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-contract-law","tag-consideration"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5374","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5374"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5374\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5677,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5374\/revisions\/5677"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5382"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5374"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5374"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fawyerz.in\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5374"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}