Tan Hee Juan V The Boon Keat

The courtheld that the contract with the minor was void and he could not sue or be sued on anycontract.

Tan hee juan v the boon keat. The plaintiff in this case was an infant. The plaintiff later by his representatives applied to the court for an order setting aside the transfer. Then the p applied to the court for an order to set aside the transfers. The court ruled that the transactions were void and ordered to the restoration of the land to the.

A sister agreed to pay an annuity of rs 653 to her brothers who provided no consideration for the promise. The court held that the transaction was void. The agreement was void. Later the plaintiff applied to the court for an order to set aside the transfers and for incidental relief.

However there are still some exemptions for this rule that is contracts of necessaries such as foods and cloths contracts of scholarship and contracts of insurance. Tan hee juan v teh boon kiat 1934 mlj 96 a child entered into a contract of transferring land. The court held that the transfers of land executed by an infant were void. Lai soon original civil jurisdiction negri sembilan hereford j civil suit no 5 of 1933 17 november 1933 land code 1926 s 42 transfer executed by a minor order avoiding the transfer discretion of court to order refund of purchase money specific relief enactment ss 38 and 41 the plaintiff an infant executed transfers.

The p infant executed transfers of land in favour of the d and the transfers were witnessed and registered. For example in tan hee juan v. Tan hee juan v. Case government of malaysia v.

Enjoy the videos and music you love upload original content and share it all with friends family and the world on youtube. That case is tan hee juan v teh 4 5. Besides of that there is another case can be refer. A contracts for necesssaries.

In tan hee juan v teh boon keat 1934 mlj 96 case law the plaintiff a minor executed a transfer of land in favor of the defendant. Rajeswary v balakrishnan 1958 3 mc 178 the p and d was engaged to be married. In this case the plaintiff had transferred ownership of a piece of land tothe defendant. Boon keat in 1934.

Tan hee juan v teh boon keat 1934 fmslr 96. All agreements entered into by a minor are void to protect minor against any consequences of its own actions presumed lack of judgement facts. The boon keat case the court held that the transfer of land executed by an infant were void. Tan hee juan by his next friend tan see bok v teh boon keat.

The d later on call off the wedding and the p sued for breach of promise to marry. Teh boon keat 19341 96. The transfers were witnessed and registered. Venkata chinnaya v verikatara ma ya 1881 i l r.

The infant executed transfers of land in favour of the defendant.