RULE OF PRIVITY OF CONTRACTS: STUDY IN INDIAN AND ENGLISH CONTEXT

AUTHOR – KANISHKA SHUKLA, ARPITA JAIN & MANAN JAIN, STUDENTS AT NARSEE MONJEE INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES

BEST CITATION – KANISHKA SHUKLA, ARPITA JAIN & MANAN JAIN, RULE OF PRIVITY OF CONTRACTS: STUDY IN INDIAN AND ENGLISH CONTEXT, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (1) OF 2025, PG. 1483-1487, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

A stranger cannot be a party to a contract, according to the common law doctrine of the principle of privity. It is one of the contested doctrines in contract law. Even though the doctrine was well-settled by judicial pronouncement, academics and the judiciary continue to disagree. It is very common for a third party or a stranger to be held accountable for the failure of contracting parties to fulfil their duties and obligations. Only the contracting or interested party is liable for obligations and duties, according to the Privity doctrines based on the interest theory. Nonetheless, as a result of the evolution of the doctrine, an exception has emerged whereby the stranger can also be held liable for obligations or duties owed to one of the contracting parties. In this review paper, the researcher will examine the meaning and historical development of the doctrine of Privity; the applicability of Contract theory to the Doctrine of Privity; the exception to the doctrine of Privity; landmark judicial pronouncements; and conduct a comparative analysis of the situation in India and England.”

KEYWORDS: Contract, Exception, English law, Obligation, Privity, and Stranger.