Law: Contract Act (IX of 1872)

Section: S. 23

Contract Act (IX of 1872), S. 23-Provisions of Statute and Rules framed thereunder prohibiting transfer of licence granted under statute-Transaction involving transfer of licence or creation of interest therein-Void-Condition attached to licence granted under Imports and Exports (Control) Act (XXXIX of 1950) and Imports and Exports Licence (Conditions of Issue) Order, 1949 Agreement in violation of such condition void .and un-enforceable.   Where there is a prevision in the statute or rules framed thereunder prohibiting transfer of a licence, lease or contract granted under the statute, a transaction involving such transfer would be void under section 23 of the Contract Act, 1872.   The control and restrictions contained in the provisions of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1950 and the imports and Exports Licence (Conditions of .Issue) Order, 1949 are not designed for the protection of the revenue but are based upon much larger considerations which affect the economy of the country with which public interest is intimately concerned. The Act is primarily designed to control, restrict and regulate imports and exports on the grounds of public policy and the Imports and Exports Licence (Conditions. of Issue) Order, 1949 makes it obligatory for the licensing authority to issue the licence subject to the condition of its non-transferability without the permission of the said authority. Where, therefore, a transaction involves the transfer without permission of licences, granted under the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1950, the agreement would be clearly in violation of the condition attached to the licence and would be void and unenforceable.   Even if the main object of statute is the protection and collection of revenue but the statute itself or the rules framed thereunder forbid the doing of a thing and provide a penalty for a contravention, an agreement calculated to defeat such a provision would still be void.   Nazaralli Sayed Imam v. Babamiya Dureyatimsha I L L 1940 Bom. 64 ; Bhikanbhai v. Hiralal I L R 1924 Born. 622 ; Bhagvant Genuji Girme v. Gangabisan Ramgopal A I R 1940 Born. 369 and Abdullah v. Mamod I L R 1926 Mad. 156…