This is the most obvious and simple way to create the agency. The word implies directly and firmly. Thus, there is a clear categorical statement of the intention of both parties, both the client and the agent, to enter into the relationship. Editor`s Note: This article analyzes the role of an agent under Indian contract law. In agency contracts, there is a legal relationship between two people in which one acts on behalf of the other. The essence of the principal-agent relationship is that the principal is too busy to do different tasks, so he hires an agent to do the same on his behalf. This relationship is based on the maxim “qui facit per alium facit per se”. An agency may be created by consent, conduct, necessity or express or implied ratification of the agent`s act by the client. The document distinguishes between agents and servants, agents and sub-agents, and sub-agents and surrogate agents. 3. There must be an agent: In an agency contract under Native American contract law, the agent is a person designated by the client to work on their behalf.
According to ยง 184, any person can become an agent, but no person who is under the legal age and who is in his good spirit can become an agent. A person acting on behalf of another person is called an agent. Many transactions are carried out through agents, as companies cannot act alone. they are legal fictions. All corporate transactions, including those involving government agencies, are carried out in this way. Agencies can be formed explicitly or implicitly. Whether the “agent” is really an “agent”, the extent of the agent`s powers and the responsibilities of the parties are all problems that often arise in agency law. The article deals with the characteristics and roles of an agent under the Indian Contract Act of 1872. In India, the agent and the client share a contractual relationship and are therefore governed by the contractual provisions between them. The basic framework for the laws and regulations that generally govern the performance and development of any type of contract, including agency contracts, is contained in Chapter X of the Indian Contracts Act, 1872. There is a legal relationship between two persons in agency contracts in which one person acts on behalf of the other person.
An agent is designated as the person on behalf of the other, and the person whose officer has the power to act is called the principal. An agency can be terminated or terminated in 5 different ways: In Syed Abdul Khader v. Rami Reddy [2]: The Supreme Court ruled that “the term agency is used to refer to the relationship that exists when a person has the authority or capacity to create legal relationships between a person occupying the position of the principal and a third party.” The court also agreed with HC`s finding that Surat had been sold directly to consumers, thereby violating the plaintiff`s exclusive agency contract. An agent can sometimes delegate the task assigned to them by the client to someone else. Normally, an agent cannot delegate the duty that he himself is supposed to fulfill to another person (delegatus non potest delegare – see below), except in certain circumstances where he must do so out of necessity. Section 191 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 defines a sub-agent as a person employed by the original agent in the affairs of the agency and acting under his control. The employment agency arises when the client behaves towards the person who is allegedly the agent of third parties as if the principle had allowed that person to be appointed as an authorized representative. The implied agency includes blog.ipleaders.in/key-covenants-agency-agreement/ Narandas Morardas Gaziwala and Ors., a partnership company based in Surat that sold lace and silver thread, had connections with another company, Krishna and Company, which acted as an agent for the sale of its goods to the commission in the three districts of Madras. After the dissolution of the company, Murugesa Chettiar, one of the partners, took over all the assets and obligations of the company. Krishna & Cie went into debt in 1951 as a result of their activities. On 1 April 1951 Murugesa Chettiar (applicant) signed a promissory note in the amount of Rs 7,500 in favour of Narandas Morardas Gaziwala, the amount classified as due and payable by Krishna & Co. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit with the Munsif District Court in Kancheepuram, requesting that the account be retained from 1 April 1951 until the date of the lawsuit to determine the amount owed and payable to him.
In response to the response, Surat filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff in the court of subordinate judge Chingleput and attempted to recover the money owed under the promissory note. With the agreement of the parties, the cases were heard at the same time. The termination of the agency of the contract is the same as the termination of a contract, except in the case where the agency is irrevocable. It can also be terminated by events such as the destruction of objects, the death of an agent or principal, and when the principal or agent becomes mentally ill. .