Mistake of law does not justify recovery under Section 72 when no special private right is shown.

Money paid under a pure mistake of law was held not recoverable under Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 where the asserted entitlement was only a general right and not a private or special right arising from peculiar facts. The court reasoned that relief under Section 72 must be read consistently with the Contract Act's principles on mistake, and that mere inequity in retention of the money was insufficient to create restitutionary relief. Voluntariness was not decisive on these facts. The payment was therefore not recoverable, and the claim failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether money paid under a pure mistake of law, without any mistake as to a private or special right arising from peculiar facts, is recoverable under Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and Article 96 of the Limitation Act, 1908.

Analysis: The right relied upon was a general right applicable to all users and not a private right arising from special facts peculiar to the petitioner. The mistake alleged was a pure mistake as to the general law in British India. Such a mistake does not fall within the class of mistakes that can found relief under Section 72, which must be read consistently with the principles governing mistake under the Contract Act. Relief is not available merely because retention of the money would appear inequitable. The question of voluntariness was therefore not decisive.

Conclusion: The payment was not recoverable. The decision is against the petitioner and in favour of the respondent.

---