Contract Act, 1872

This Act may be called the
Contract Act, 1872
.

It extends to the whole of Bangladesh; and it shall come into force on the first day of September, 1872.

Nothing herein contained shall affect the provisions of any Statute, Act or Regulation not hereby expressly repealed, nor any usage or custom of trade, nor any incident of any contract, not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act.

In this Act the following words and expressions are used in the following senses, unless a contrary intention appears from the context:-
(a) When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal:
(b) When the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted. A proposal, when accepted becomes a promise:
(c) The person making the proposal is called the "promisor" and the person accepting the proposal is called the "promisee":
(d) When, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee or any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise:
(e) Every promise and every set of promises, forming the consideration for each other, is an agreement:
(f) Promises which form the consideration or part of the consideration for each other are called reciprocal promises:
(g) An agreement not enforceable by law is said to be void:
(h) An agreement enforceable by law is a contract:
(i) An agreement which is enforceable by law at the option of one or more of the parties thereto, but not at the option of the other or others, is a voidable contract:
(j) A contract which ceases to be enforceable by law becomes void when it ceases to be enforceable.

The communication of proposals, the acceptance of proposals, and the revocation of proposals and acceptances, respectively, are deemed to be made by any act or omission of the party proposing, accepting or revoking by which he intends to communicate such proposal, acceptance or revocation, or which has the effect of communicating it.

The communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made.
The communication of an acceptance is complete,–
as against the proposer, when it is put in a course of transmission to him, so as to be out of the power of the acceptor;
as against the acceptor, when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer.
The communication of a revocation is complete,-
as against the person who makes it, when it is put into a course of transmission to the person to whom it is made, so as to be out of the power of the person who makes it;
as against the person to whom it is made, when it comes to his knowledge.

Illustrations
(a) A proposes, by letter, to sell a house to B at a certain price.
The communication of the proposal is complete when B receives the letter.
(b) B accepts A's proposal by a letter sent by post.
The communication of the acceptance is complete,–
as against A, when the letter is posted;
as against B, when the letter is received by A.
(c) A revokes his proposal by telegram.
The revocation is complete as against A when the telegram is despatched. It is complete as against B when B receives it.
B revokes his acceptance by telegram. B's revocation is complete as against B when the telegram is despatched, and as against A when it reaches him.

A proposal may be revoked at any time before the communication of its acceptance is complete as against the proposer, but not afterwards.
An acceptance may be revoked at any time before the communication of the acceptance is complete as against the acceptor, but not afterwards.

Illustrations
A proposes, by a letter sent by post, to sell his house to B.
B accepts the proposal by a letter sent by post.
A may revoke his proposal at any time before or at the moment when B posts his letter of acceptance, but not afterwards.
B may revoke his acceptance as any time before or at the moment when the letter communicating it reaches A, but not afterwards.

A proposal is revoked –

In order to convert a proposal into a promise, the acceptance must-

Performance of the conditions of a proposal, or the acceptance of any consideration for a reciprocal promise which may be offered with a proposal, is an acceptance of the proposal.

In so far as the proposal or acceptance of any promise is made in words, the promise is said to be express. In so far as such proposal or acceptance is made otherwise than in words, the promise is said to be implied.

All agreements are contracts if they are made by the free consent of parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and are not hereby expressly declared to be void.
Nothing herein contained shall affect any law in force in Bangladesh, and not hereby expressly repealed, by which any contract is required to be made in writing or in the presence of witnesses, or any law relating to the registration of documents.

Every person is competent to contract who is of the age of majority according to the law to which he is subject, and who is of sound mind, and is not disqualified from contracting by any law to which he is subject.

A person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract if, at the time when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his interests.
A person who is usually of unsound mind, but occasionally of sound mind, may make a contract when he is of sound mind.
A person who is usually of sound mind, but occasionally of unsound mind, may not make a contract when he is of unsound mind.

Illustrations
(a) A patient in a lunatic asylum, who is at intervals of sound mind, may contract during those intervals.
(b) A sane man, who is delirious from fever or who is so drunk that he cannot understand the terms of a contract or form a rational judgment as to its effect on his interests, cannot contract whilst such delirium or drunkenness lasts.

Two or more persons are said to consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense.

Consent is said to be free when it is not caused by-

"Coercion" is the committing, or threatening to commit, any act forbidden by the Penal Code or the unlawful detaining or threatening to detain, any property, to the prejudice of any person whatever, with the intention of causing any person to enter into an agreement.

Explanation- It is immaterial whether the Penal Code is or is not in force in the place where the coercion is employed.

Illustrations
A, on board an English ship on the high seas, causes B to enter into an agreement by an act amounting to criminal intimidation under the Penal Code.
A afterwards sues B for breach of contract at Chittagong.
A has employed coercion, although his act is not an offence by the law of England, and although section 506 of the Penal Code was not in force at the time when or place where the act was done.

Illustrations
(a) A having advanced money to his son, B, during his minority, upon B's coming of age obtains, by misuse of parental influence, a bond from B for a greater amount than the sum due in respect of the advance. A employs undue influence.
(b) A, a man enfeebled by disease or age, is induced, by B's influence over him as his medical attendant, to agree to pay B an unreasonable sum for his professional services. B employs undue influence.
(c) A, being in debt to B, the money-lender of his village, contracts a fresh loan on terms which appear to be unconscionable. It lies on B to prove that the contract was not induced by undue influence.
(d) A applies to a banker for a loan at a time when there is stringency in the money market. The banker declines to make the loan except at an unusually high rate of interest. A accepts the loan on these terms. This is a transaction in the ordinary course of business, and the contract is not induced by undue influence.

"Fraud" means and includes any of the following acts committed by a party to a contract, or with his connivance, or by his agent, with intent to deceive another party thereto or his agent, or to induce him to enter into the contract:-

Explanation– Mere silence as to facts likely to affect the willingness of a person to enter into a contract is not fraud, unless the circumstances of the case are such that, regard being had to them, it is the duty of the person keeping silence to speak, or unless his silence is, in itself, equivalent to speech.

Illustrations
(a) A sells, by auction, to B, a horse which A knows to be unsound. A says nothing to B about the horse's unsoundness. This is not fraud in A.
(b) B is A's daughter and has just come of age. Here, the relation between the parties would make it A's duty to tell B if the horse is unsound.
(c) B says to A-"If you do not deny it, I shall assume that the horse is sound." A says nothing. Here, A's silence is equivalent to speech.
(d) A and B, being traders, enter upon a contract. A has private information of a change in prices which would affect B's willingness to proceed with the contract. A is not bound to inform B.

“Misrepresentation" means and includes–

When consent to an agreement is caused by coercion, fraud or misrepresentation, the agreement is a contract viodable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused.
A party to a contract, whose consent was caused by fraud or misrepresentation, may, if he thinks fit, insist that the contract shall be performed, and that he shall be put in the position in which he would have been if the representations made had been true.

Exception–If such consent was caused by misrepresenta-tion or by silence, fraudulent within the meaning of section 17, the contract, nevertheless, is not voidable, if the party whose consent was so caused had the means of discovering the truth with ordinary diligence.

Explanation– A fraud or misrepresentation which did not cause the consent to a contract of the party on whom such fraud was practised, or to whom such misrepresentation was made, does not render a contract voidable.

Illustrations
(a) A, intending to deceive B, falsely represents that five hundred maunds of indigo are made annually at A's factory, and thereby induces B to buy the factory. The contract is voidable at the option of B.
(b) A, by a misrepresentation, leads B erroneously to believe that five hundred maunds of indigo are made annually at A's factory. B examines the accounts of the factory, which show that only four hundred maunds of indigo have been made. After this B buys the factory. The contract is not voidable on account of A's misrepresentation.
(c) A fraudulently informs B that A's estate is free from encumbrance. B thereupon buys the estate. The estate is subject to a mortgage. B may either avoid the contract, or may insist on its being carried out and the mortgage-debt redeemed.
(d) B, having discovered a vein of ore on the estate of A, adopts means to conceal, and does conceal, the existence of the ore from A. Through A's ignorance B is enabled to buy the estate at an under-value. The contract is voidable at the option of A.
(e) A is entitled to succeed to an estate at the death of B; B dies: C, having received intelligence of B's death, prevents the intelligence reaching A, and thus induces A to sell him his interest in the estate. The sale is voidable at the option of A.

2
[19A. When consent to an agreement is caused by undue influence, the agreement is a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused.
Any such contract may be set aside either absolutely or, if the party who was entitled to avoid it has received any benefit thereunder, upon such terms and conditions as to the Court may seem just.

Illustrations
(a) A's son has forged B's name to a promissory note. B, under threat of prosecuting A's son, obtains a bond from A for the amount of the forged note. If B sues on this bond, the Court may set the bond aside.
(b) A, a money-lender, advances Taka 100 to B, an agriculturist, and, by undue influence, induces B to execute a bond for Taka 200 with interest at 6 per cent per month. The Court may set the bond aside, ordering B to repay the Taka 100 with such interest as may seem just.]

Where both the parties to an agreement are under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement, the agreement is void.

Explanation- An erroneous opinion as to the value of the thing which forms the subject-matter of the agreement is not to be deemed a mistake as to a matter of fact.

Illustrations
(a) A agrees to sell to B a specific cargo of goods supposed to be on its way from England to
2
[Chittagong]. It turns out that, before the day of the bargain, the ship conveying the cargo had been cast away and the goods lost. Neither party was aware of the facts. The agreement is void.
(b) A agrees to buy from B a certain horse. It turns out that the horse was dead at the time of the bargain, though neither party was aware of the fact. The agreement is void.
(c) A, being entitled to an estate for the life of B, agrees to sell it to C. B was dead at the time of the agreement, but both parties were ignorant of the fact. The agreement is void.

A contract is not voidable because it was caused by a mistake as to any law in force in Bangladesh; but a mistake as to a law not in force in Bangladesh has the same effect as a mistake of fact.
2
[* * *]

IllustrationA and B make a contract grounded on the erroneous belief that a particular debt is barred by the Bangladesh Law of Limitation: the contract is not voidable.

A contract is not voidable merely because it was caused by one of the parties to it being under a mistake as to a matter of fact.

The consideration or object of an agreement is lawful, unless- it is forbidden by law; or
is of such a nature that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of any law; or
is fraudulent; or
involves or implies injury to the person or property of another; or the Court regards it as immoral, or opposed to public policy.
In each of these cases, the consideration or object of an agreement is said to be unlawful. Every agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful is void.

Illustrations
(a) A agrees to sell his house to B for 10,000 Taka. Here B's promise to pay the sum of 10,000 Taka is the consideration for A's promise to sell the house, and A's promise to sell the house is the consideration for B's promise to pay the 10,000 Taka. These are lawful considerations.
(b) A promises to pay B 1,000 Taka at the end of six months; if C, who owes that sum to B, fails to pay it. B promises to grant time to C accordingly. Here the promise of each party is the consideration for the promise of the other party and they are lawful considerations.
(c) A promises, for a certain sum paid to him by B, to make good to B the value of his ship if it is wrecked on a certain voyage. Here A's promise is the consideration for B's payment and B's payment is the consideration for A's promise and these are lawful considerations.
(d) A promises to maintain B's child and B's promises to pay A 1,000 Taka yearly for the purpose. Here the promise of each party is the consideration for the promise of the other party. They are lawful considerations.
(e) A, B and C enter into an agreement for the division among them of gains acquired, or to be acquired, by them by fraud. The agreement is void, as its object is unlawful.
(f) A promises to obtain for B an employment in the public service, and B promises to pay 1,000 Taka to A. The agreement is void, as the consideration for it is unlawful.
(g) A, being agent for a landed proprietor, agrees for money, without the knowledge of his principal, to obtain for B a lease of land belonging to his principal. The agreement between A and B is void, as it implies a fraud by concealment by A, on his principal.
(h) A promises B to drop a prosecution which he has instituted against B for robbery, and B promises to restore the value of the things taken. The agreement is void, as its object is unlawful.
(i) A's estate is sold for arrears of revenue under the provisions of an Act of the Legislature, by which the defaulter is prohibited from purchasing the estate. B, upon an understanding with A, becomes the purchaser, and agrees to convey the estate to A upon receiving from him the price which B has paid. The agreement is void, as it renders the transaction, in effect, a purchase by the defaulter, and would so defeat the object of the law.
(j) A, who is B's mukhtar, promises to exercise his influence, as such, with B in favour of C, and C promises to pay 1,000 Taka to A. The agreement is void, because it is immoral.
(k) A agrees to let her daughter to hire to B for concubinage. The agreement is void, because it is immoral, though the letting may not be punishable under the Penal Code.

If any part of a single consideration for one or more objects, or any one or any part of any one of several considerations for a single object is unlawful, the agreement is void.

IllustrationA promises to superintend, on behalf of B, a legal manufacture of indigo, and an illegal traffic in other articles. B promises to pay to A a salary of 10,000 Taka a year. The agreement is void, the object of A's promise and the considerations B's promise being in part unlawful.

An agreement made without consideration is void, unless–

Explanation1 – Nothing in this section shall affect the validity, as between the donor and donee, of any gift actually made.

Explanation2 – An agreement to which the consent of the promisor is freely given is not void merely because the consideration is inadequate; but the inadequacy of the consideration may be taken into account by the Court in determining the question whether the consent of the promisor was freely given.

Illustrations
(a) A promises, for no consideration, to give to B Taka 1,000. This is a void agreement.
(b) A, for natural love and affection, promises to give his son, B, Taka 1,000. A puts his promise to B into writing and registers it. This is a contract.
(c) A finds B's purse and gives it to him. B promises to give A Taka 50. This is a contract.
(d) A supports B's infant son. B promises to pay A's expenses in so doing. This is a contract.
(e) A owes B Taka 1,000, but the debt is barred by the Limitation Act. A signs a written promise to pay B Taka 500 on account of the debt. This is a contract.
(f) A agrees to sell a horse worth Taka 1,000 for Taka 10. A's consent to the agreement was freely given. The agreement is a contract notwithstanding the inadequacy of the consideration.
(g) A agrees to sell a horse worth Taka 1,000 for Taka 10. A denies that his consent to the agreement was freely given.
The inadequacy of the consideration is a fact which the Court should take into account in considering whether or not A's consent was freely given.

Every agreement in restrain of the marriage of any person, other than a minor, is void.

Every agreement by which any one is restrained from exercising a lawful profession, trade or business of any kind, is to that extent void.

Exception1.–One who sells the good-will of a business may agree with the buyer to refrain from carrying on a similar business, within specified local limits, so long as the buyer, or any person deriving title to the good-will from him, carries on a like business therein: Provided that such limits appear to the Court reasonable, regard being had to the nature of the business.

Exception2 and 3. [Repealed by section 73 and 2nd Schedule of the
Partnership Act, 1932
(Act No. IX of 1932).]

Every agreement, by which any party thereto is restricted absolutely from enforcing his rights under or in respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary tribunals, or which limits the time within which he may thus enforce his rights, is void to that extent.

Exception1.–This section shall not render illegal a contract by which two or more persons agree that any dispute which may arise between them in respect of any subject or class of subjects shall be referred to arbitration, and that only the amount awarded in such arbitration shall be recoverable in respect of the dispute so referred.

Exception2.-Nor shall this section render illegal any contract in writing, by which two or more persons agree to refer to arbitration any question between them which has already arisen, or affect any provision of any law in force for the time being as to references to arbitration.

Agreements, the meaning of which is not certain, or capable of being made certain, are void.

Illustrations
(a) A agrees to sell to B "a hundred tons of oil". There is nothing whatever to show what kind of oil was intended. The agreement is void for uncertainty.
(b) A agrees to sell to B one hundred tons of oil of a specified description, known as an article of commerce. There is no uncertainty here to make the agreement void.
(c) A, who is a dealer in coconut-oil only, agrees to sell to B "one hundred tons of oil". The nature of A's trade affords an indication of the meaning of the words, and A has entered into a contract for the sale of one hundred tons of Coconut-oil.
(d) A agrees to sell B "all the grain in my granary at
2
[Rangpur]". There is no uncertainty here to make the agreement void.
(e) A agrees to sell to B "one thousand mounds of rice at a price to be fixed by C". As the price is capable of being made certain, there is no uncertainty here to make the agreement void.
(f) A agrees to sell to B "my white horse for Taka five hundred or Taka one thousand". There is nothing to show which of the two prices was to be given. The agreement is void.

Agreements by way of wager are void; and no suit shall be brought for recovering anything alleged to be own on any wager, or entrusted to any person to abide the result of any game or other uncertain event on which wager is made.
This section shall not be deemed to render unlawful a subscription, or contribution, or agreement to subscribe or contribute, made or entered into for or toward any plate, prize or sum of money, of the value or amount of five hundred Taka or upwards, to be awarded to the winner or winners of any horse race.
Nothing in this section shall be deemed to legalize any transaction connected with horse-racing, to which the provisions of section 294A of the Penal Code apply.

2
[30A. All agreements knowingly made to further or assist the entering into, effecting or carrying out, or to secure or guarantee the performance, of any agreement void under section 30, are void.

No suit or other proceeding shall lie for the recovery of–
(a) any sum of money paid or payable in respect of any agreement void under section 30A, or
(b) any commission, brokerage, fee, or reward in respect of knowingly effecting or carrying out, or aiding in effecting or carrying out, of any such agreement or of any sum of money otherwise claimed or claimable in respect thereof, or
(c) any sum of money knowingly paid or payable on account of any person by way of commission, brokerage, fee, reward or other claim in respect of any such agreement.

No guardian, executor, administrator, heir or personal representative of any minor or deceased person, as the case may be, shall be entitled to or allowed any credit in his account for or in respect of any payment made by him on behalf of such minor or deceased person in respect of any such agreement, or any such commission, brokerage, fee, reward or claim as is referred to in sections 30A and 30B.]

A "contingent contract" is a contract to do or not to do something, if some event, collateral to such contract, does or does not happen.

IllustrationA contracts to pay B Taka 10,000 if B's house is burnt. This is a contingent contract.

Contingent contracts to do or not to do anything if an uncertain future event happens cannot be enforced by law unless and until that event has happened.
If the event becomes impossible, such contracts become void.

Illustrations
(a) A makes a contract with B to buy B's horse if A survives C. This contract cannot be enforced by law unless and until C dies in A's lifetime.
(b) A makes a contract with B to sell a horse to B at a specified price, if C, to whom the horse has been offered, refuses to buy him. The contract cannot be enforced by law unless and until C refuses to buy the horse.
(c) A contracts to pay B a sum of money when B marries C. C dies without being married to B. The contract becomes void.

Contingent contracts to do or not to do anything if an uncertain future event does not happen can be enforced when the happening of that event becomes impossible, and not before.

IllustrationA agrees to pay B a sum of money if a certain ship does not return. The ship is sunk. The contract can be enforced when the ship sinks.

If the future event on which a contract is contingent is the way in which a person will act at an unspecified time, the event shall be considered to become impossible when such person does anything which renders it impossible that he should so act within any definite time, or otherwise than under further contingencies.

IllustrationA agrees to pay B a sum of money if B marries C.
C marries D. The marriage of B to C must now be considered impossible, although it is possible that D may die and that C may afterwards marry B.

Contingent contracts to do or not to do anything if a specified uncertain event happens within a fixed time become void if, at the expiration of the time fixed, such event has not happened, or if, before the time fixed, such event becomes impossible.

Contingent contracts to do or not to do anything if a specified uncertain event does not happen within a fixed time may be enforced by law when the time fixed has expired and such event has not happened or, before the time fixed has expired, if it becomes certain that such event will not happen.

Illustrations
(a) A promises to pay B a sum of money if a certain ship returns within a year. The contract may be enforced if the ship returns within the year, and becomes void if the ship is burnt within the year.
(b) A promises to pay B a sum of money if a certain ship does not return within a year. The contract may be enforced if the ship does not return within the year, or is burnt within the year.

Contingent agreements to do or not to do anything, if an impossible event happens, are void, whether the impossibility of the event is known or not to the parties to the agreement at the time when it is made.

Illustrations
(a) A agrees to pay B 1,000 Taka if two straight lines should enclose a space. The agreement is void.
(b) A agrees to pay B 1,000 Taka if B will marry A's daughter C. C was dead at the time of the agreement. The agreement is void.

The parties to a contract must either perform, or offer to perform, their respective promises, unless such performance is dispensed with or excused under the provisions of this Act, or of any other law.
Promises bind the representatives of the promisors in case of the death of such promisors before performance, unless a contrary intention appears from the contract.

Illustrations
(a) A promises to deliver goods to B on a certain day on payment of Taka 1,000. A dies before that day. A's representatives are bound to deliver the goods to B, and B is bound to pay the Taka 1,000 to A's representatives.
(b) A promises to paint a picture for B by a certain day, at a certain price. A dies before the day. The contract cannot be enforced either by A's representatives or by B.

Where a promisor has made an offer of performance to the promisee, and the offer has not been accepted, the promisor is not responsible for non-performance, nor does he thereby lose his rights under the contract.
Every such offer must fulfil the following conditions:–

IllustrationA contracts to deliver to B at his warehouse, on the 1st March, 1873, 100 bales of cotton of a particular quality. In order to make an offer of a performance with the effect stated in this section, A must bring the cotton to B's warehouse, on the appointed day, under such circumstances that B may have a reasonable opportunity of satisfying himself that the thing offered is cotton of the quality contracted for, and that there are 100 bales.

When a party to a contract has refused to perform, or disabled himself from performing his promise in its entirety, the promisee may put an end to the contract, unless he has signified, by words or conduct, his acquiescence in its continuance.

Illustrations
(a) A, a singer, enters into a contract with B, the manager of a theatre, to sing at his theater two nights in every week during the next two months, and B engages to pay her 100 Taka for each nights performance. On the sixth night A wilfully absents herself from the theatre. B is at liberty to put an end to the contract.
(b) A, a singer, enters into a contract with B, the manager of a theatre, to sing at his theatre two nights in every week during the next two months, and B engages to pay her at the rate of 100 Taka for each night. On the sixth night A wilfully absents herself. With the assent of B, A sings on the seventh night. B has signified his acquiescence in the continuance of the contract, and cannot now put an end to it, but is entitled to compensation for the damage sustained by him through A's failure to sing on the sixth night.

If it appears from the nature of the case that it was the intention of the parties to any contract that any promise contained in it should be performed by the promisor himself, such promise must be performed by the promisor. In other cases, the promisor or his representatives may employ a competent person to perform it.Illustrations
(a) A promises to pay B a sum of money. A may perform this promise, either by personally paying the money to B or by causing it to be paid to B by another; and, if A dies before the time appointed for payment, his representatives must perform the promise, or employ some proper person to do so.
(b) A promises to paint a picture for B. A must perform this promise personally.

When a promisee accepts performance of the promise from a third person, he cannot afterwards enforce it against the promisor.

When two or more persons have made a joint promise, then, unless a contrary intention appears by the contract, all such persons during their joint lives, and after the death of any of them his representative jointly with the survivor or survivors, and after the death of the last survivor, the representatives of all jointly, must fulfil the promise.

When two or more persons make a joint promise, the promisee may, in the absence of express agreement to the contrary, compel any one or more of such joint promisors to perform the whole of the promise.
Each of two or more joint promisors may compel every other joint promisor to contribute equally with himself to the performance of the promise, unless a contrary intention appears from the contract.
If any one of two or more joint promisors makes default in such contribution, the remaining joint promisors must bear the loss arising from such default in equal shares.

Explanation– Nothing in this section shall prevent a surety from recovering from his principal, payments made by the surety on behalf of the principal, or entitle the principal to recover anything from the surety on account of payments made by the principal.

Illustrations
(a) A, B and C jointly promise to pay D 3,000 Taka. D may compel either A or B or C to pay him 3,000 Taka.
(b) A, B and C jointly promise to pay D the sum of 3,000 Taka. C is compelled to pay the whole. A is insolvent, but his assets are sufficient to pay one-half of his debts. C is entitled to receive 500 Taka from A's estate, and 1,250 Taka from B.
(c) A, B and C are under a joint promise to pay D 3,000 Taka. C is unable to pay anything, and A is compelled to pay the whole. A is entitled to receive 1,500 Taka from B.
(d) A, B and C are under a joint promise to pay D 3,000 Taka, A and B being only sureties for C. C fails to pay. A and B are compelled to pay the whole sum. They are entitled to recover it from C.