574 DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR : WRITINGS AND SPEECHES
30 Cal. 539 P. C. Mohori Bibee vs. Dharemdas Chose.
On the 20th of July 1895 Damodar Das executed a mortgage in favour of one Brahma Dutt, a money lender. Brahma Dutt was absent throughout the transaction and the transaction was carried through by his attorney Kedar Nath, the money being found by Dedraj the local manager of Brahma Dutt. While the transaction was going on, the mother of Damodar Das wrote a letter to Kedar Nath the attorney that Damodar Das was a minor and any one advancing him any monies would do so at his own risk.
On the date of the mortgage Kedar Nath took a long declaration from Damodar Das that he was major.
On the 10th September 1895 the mother filed a suit for cancellation of the Deed of Mortgage on the ground that D was a Minor.
Contention of B was that D was estopped. Held he was not because facts was known to B.
Actually knowing the fact is different from having the means of knowing it.
L. R . 20 Ch. D. 1. Redgrave vs. Hurd.
The Plaintiff represented that his business brought in about £ 300 a year and produced 3 Summaries showing about
2/3rd of that together with some papers which Defendant did not examine. Upon the faith of this Defendant signed an agreement to purchase the Plaintiffs business and paid a deposit. Finding the business worthless he refused to complete and Plaintiff sued him for specific performance. Contention of Plaintiff was that Defendant was estopped from alleging that the representation of Plaintiff was false because he had the means of knowing the truth.
Jessel M. R. P. 21.
“Where one person induces another to enter into a contract by a material representation which is untrue, it is no defence to an action to rescind the contract that the person to whom the representation was made, had the means of discovering or might with reasonable deligence have discovered that it was untrue. It must be shown either that he had knowledge of the facts contrary to the representation, or that he stated in terms or shewed clearly by his conduct, that he did not rely on the representation.”