Richard Garth, C.J. (McDonell, J., concurring)
1. The only point, as we understand, which is referred to us in this case is, whether, having regard to Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, a minor, who is the obligee of a bond given for the value of certain goods, can sue upon it.
2. The Munsif considers that he cannot, because the bond is void, as having been entered into by a party not competent to contract.
3. We think this is a mistake. It is true that the language of the Indian Contract Act may well have led to the mistake; but we consider that the law here is the same as it is in England. A contract entered into with a minor is only voidable at the option of the minor see Addison on Contracts 3rd edition page 169; Hari Ram v. Jitan Ram 3 B.L.R. A.C. 426.