https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277442 A promissory note was held unenforceable because the advances were made pursuant to an earlier undertaking to finance litigation, not at the respondent's independent desire. On those facts, the payments did not constitute consideration under Section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Court also held that Section 25(2) did not apply, since the money was not advanced voluntarily in the statutory sense and the note did not record a valid promise to compensate for a voluntary act already done. The note therefore lacked lawful consideration and could not be enforced. en-us Thu, 18 Mar 1948 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Dec 2018 12:31:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277442 A promissory note was held unenforceable because the advances were made pursuant to an earlier undertaking to finance litigation, not at the respondent's independent desire. On those facts, the payments did not constitute consideration under Section 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Court also held that Section 25(2) did not apply, since the money was not advanced voluntarily in the statutory sense and the note did not record a valid promise to compensate for a voluntary act already done. The note therefore lacked lawful consideration and could not be enforced. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Mar 1948 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277442