rights and duties of agent
RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF AGENT UNDER THE LAW OF AGENCY
Introduction
The law of agency is based on the maxim “Qui facit per alium facit per se” i.e. he who does an act through another does it by himself. The concept of representative capacity is the totem of agency.
In the hustle and bustle of everyday life it sometimes becomes impossible to do everything ourselves and hence it becomes necessary to employ people to perform our acts. The person employed is the agent and the contract by which he is appointed is called agency. It is the principal who appoints the agent. In an agency, an agent acts on behalf of his principal and often uses his name and his acts in that capacity are attributable to the principal. ‘Agent’ is defined in Section 182 of The Indian Contract Act, 1872 as;
182. “Agent” and “principal” defined-An agent is a person employed to do any act for another, or to represent another in dealings with third persons. The person for whom such act is done, or who is so represented, is called the principal.
The implication of the definition being wide enough it is important to have the right approach. It is the agent’s representative capacity coupled with a power to affect the legal relations of the principal with the third persons which is the distinguishing feature of agency, as enunciated by Vivian Bose J in Kalyanji Kunwarji v Tirkaram Sheolal.
The most important requisite of agency is that the principal must be competent to contract as agency is a contract of employment to bring the principal into legal relations with the third party.
183. Who may employ agent-Any person who is of the age of majority according to the law which he is subject, and who is of sound mind, may employ an agent.
The appointment of an agent involves a contract and a minor’s agreement being void, thus a minor cannot employ an agent. The agent need not be competent to contract because he merely acts on behalf of his principal and incurs no
Introduction
The law of agency is based on the maxim “Qui facit per alium facit per se” i.e. he who does an act through another does it by himself. The concept of representative capacity is the totem of agency.
In the hustle and bustle of everyday life it sometimes becomes impossible to do everything ourselves and hence it becomes necessary to employ people to perform our acts. The person employed is the agent and the contract by which he is appointed is called agency. It is the principal who appoints the agent. In an agency, an agent acts on behalf of his principal and often uses his name and his acts in that capacity are attributable to the principal. ‘Agent’ is defined in Section 182 of The Indian Contract Act, 1872 as;
182. “Agent” and “principal” defined-An agent is a person employed to do any act for another, or to represent another in dealings with third persons. The person for whom such act is done, or who is so represented, is called the principal.
The implication of the definition being wide enough it is important to have the right approach. It is the agent’s representative capacity coupled with a power to affect the legal relations of the principal with the third persons which is the distinguishing feature of agency, as enunciated by Vivian Bose J in Kalyanji Kunwarji v Tirkaram Sheolal.
The most important requisite of agency is that the principal must be competent to contract as agency is a contract of employment to bring the principal into legal relations with the third party.
183. Who may employ agent-Any person who is of the age of majority according to the law which he is subject, and who is of sound mind, may employ an agent.
The appointment of an agent involves a contract and a minor’s agreement being void, thus a minor cannot employ an agent. The agent need not be competent to contract because he merely acts on behalf of his principal and incurs no
References: 3. Tichel v Short, (1750) 2 Ves Sen 239. 4 5. Lilley v Doubleday,(1881) 7 QBD 510. 6. Ireland v Livingston,(1872) 2 QB 99. 7. Ferrer v Robbins,(1835) 2 CM & R 152. 8. State Bank of Indore v National Textile Corpn,(2004) 4 MPLJ 214. 9. James Eggay Tailor v United Africa Co.(1937). 10. Keppel v Wheeler,(1927) 1 KB 577. 12. Mollet v Robinson,(1870) LR 5 CP 646. 13. Armstrong v Jackson,(1917) 2 KB 822. 14. Bentley v Craven,(1853) 18 Beav 75. 15. Bhola Nath v Mul Chand,ILR (1901-03) 25 All 639. 16. National Shipping Corpn of Saudi Arabia v Sentrans Industries Ltd,(2004) 2 Bom CR 1. 17. John McCain and Co v Pow,(1975) 1 All ER 129 (CA). 21. Moon v Whitney Union,(1837) 43 RR 802. 22. Mason v Joseph,(1804) 1 Smith KB 406. 23. Calico Printers’ Assn v Barclays Bank,(1931) 145 LT 51 (CA). 25. Sellers v London Countris Newspapers,(1951) 1 All ER 544 (CA). 26. Ayyanah Chetty v Subramania Iyer,(1923) 45 MLJ 409. 27. Peacock v Freeman,(1888) 4 TLR 541 (CA). 30. Tribe v Taylor,(1876) LR 1 CPD 503. 31. Ellas v Govind Chandar,ILR (1903) 30 Cal 202. 33. Heath v Parkinson,(1926) 42 TLR 693. 34. Menon v Cochin Mercantiles Ltd,(1962)32 Comp Cass 378. 35. Houghten v Mathew,(1803) 3 Boss & P 485. 36. Pestonji Bhimji v Ravji Jverchand,(1934) 150 IC 483 (Sind). 37. Williams v Mellington,(1788) 1 Hy B1 81. 39. Ramprasad v State of M.P.,(1969) 3 SCC 24,27. 40. Kishanlal v Bhanwar Lal,AIR 1954 SC 500 (1955).