Modes of Creation of Agency: Critical Analysis

1.    Introduction:

In the contemporary Modern arena, no transaction is possible without a proper contract. Indian Contract Act,1872, apart from general contracts (Section 1 to 75), also provides a detailed description of Special contracts like the Contract of Agency, which helps different business stakeholders to formulate the respective business efficiently.  

The Phenomena of Agency defined under Chapter 10 of the Indian Contract Act,1872, is considered a very imperative concept in the rapidly growing commercial globe.  Further, the perception of creating agency is born upon the Latin maxim” Qui facit per alium facit per se “, which means “He who another, act himself”.

The Article aims to highlight different modes of creating the agency by encountering nuances present in the concept.  After reading the Article text, Readers get a better understanding and perception of how the law regulates the agency by imposing liability to both principals and agents in different circumstances.  The Article concludes by analysing the overall implication of the creating agency.

2.    Conceptual Understanding of Contract of Agency:

The concept of agency was created by Modern courts to redress disputes that arose out of certain facts and situations. These situations originated from ordinary employer-employee relationships. When any employee, in the course of employment, performs an act that harms any other third individual or entity's property, the employer is liable to compensate for all such harms.

Section 182 of the Indian Contract Act,1872, provides a brief description of the term’s “agent” and “Principal.” An agent is a proxy or representative for another who is obliged to use authority based on the work entrusted by another person. The principal is the person for whom the act is done or who authorizes another person to work for him according to his instructions.

The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Syed Abdul Khader v. Rami Reddy defined what exactly constitutes the contract of an Agency.  The Court held that the agency is used to produce the relationship between the person entrusted with the authority of the principal and the third person. Moreover, the court delivered that the Agent is appointed by the principal as his proxy for the third party.  Further, in the case of P. Krishna v. Mundila Ganapathi, the Madras High Court held that a Contract of Agency is only considered valid when the agent demonstrates himself as the proxy of the principal in the business negotiation.

3.     Essentials of Valid Contract of Agency:

There are certain explicit provisions under Sections 183, 184, and 185 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, that deal specifically with the necessary conditions to formulate the contract of Agency apart from the ordinary essentials mentioned earlier in the Indian Contract Act, 1872, like Valid agreements, consent of parties, Intention to enter into valid contracts etc.

Under Section 183 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, it advocates that the principal shall be competent to enter into the contract, i.e., must be major and of sound mind. Likewise, Section 184 states that an Agent must also be competent to enter into a legally binding relationship, however, with the exception that valid contractual relationship between Minor agent and Principal but that agent is not held personally liable for his respective acts.

Moreover, Section 185 very interestingly explains that there is no requirement of Consideration in the contract of Agency. The logic behind this provision is that there is no actual agreement between the Principal and Agent but only between the principal and third party, and the agent is merely the proxy and not party to contract and thus no requirement of consideration with Agent at any circumstances.

4.    Modes of Creation of the Agency:

 To enforce the principal’s liability towards the third person, a principal-agent relationship is a most important prerequisite without which the formulation of contract of agency is impossible. Therefore, to make the contract of agency legally admissible, the principal is made liable for the action of agents in the following situations or mode –

1.      By Conferring Actual Authority to the Agent on behalf of the principal

2.      Agent Authority in situation of “Emergency”

3.      By Conduct of Principal through law of Estoppel” ‘

4.      Ratification by Principal of Agent Act.

5.       Presumption of Husband Wife Relationship.

 

4.1     Exercising Actual Authority by the Agent:

According to Section 186 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, an Agent can exercise its authority by both expressed and implied agreement. An express contract of agency can be explicitly made orally as well as in written format.  Generally, in the Contract of agency, the principal appoints the agent through expressed agreement.  However, when the agent gets appointed through a written agreement or deed, it is known as the power of Attorney. This gives the agent the right to act on behalf of the principal

Moreover, Section 187 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, defines implied authority as any circumstances or situation where, from the conduct of either parties implied authority can be assured.  Implied Authority can be exercised in the following cases –

1.      Inferred from the circumstances.

2.      From Spoken or written agreement.

3.       Circumstances arise out of an ordinary course of dealings.

In Howard v. Sheward, the Hon’ble court held that an agent acting on behalf of the principal to sell the horse carries the implied authority to provide a warranty to the buyer that the Horse is of sound mind.

4.2     Exercising Authority During an Emergency:

Section 189 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, vividly describes that the Agent is obliged to perform by exercising all its potential at an optimum level. Moreover, the agent is mandated to exercise his authority like an ordinary prudent individual to protect the interest or loss of the principal.

4.3     Exercising Authority by Estoppel:

Section 237 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, provides a vivid description of the agency created by the Estoppel.  In this scenario, the Agent neither has expressed nor implied authority to act on behalf of the Principal. According to this provision, the principal, through his actions or conducts, demonstrates that the person is acting as his proxy in the mind of the third person.  The essential ingredient to establish this mode of agency is that the Third Person must create the impression in his mind that the person doing work is acting on behalf of the principal.

In the Landmark case of Amagas ltd. v. Mundogas S.A, The Hon’ble Court held by defining the Ostensible Authority as when the principal through his words or conducts showcase that Agent has actual authority to act on his behalf to that extent of the Contract. Moreover, the Third or the contracting party creates an impression that the agent has really been authorised to act for the Principal.

4.4  Exercise Authority through Ratification by the Principal:

 Ratification means giving any action subsequent approval. In the contract of Agency, there are many instances where one person pretends to act on the behalf of another person although not authorised or entrusted to take care of the same actions. However, Contract law provides one situation where the act of a pretended agent can be lawfully authorised. This situation is applicable when after the performance of the action of agent principal verified or justified the same as authorise or done on his behalf this situation is known as ratification.

Section 196  and other sections of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, provide seven essential conditions that need to be fulfilled to lawfully ratify any agent actions.

1.      The first essential discussed under Section 196 is that the act shall be done on behalf of the person who can approve the prior actions. This concept is elaborated further in the case of Keighley, Maxsted & Co. v. Durant, where the plaintiff instructed Robert to purchase the wheat on the joint account at the particular definite rate. However, due to high prices, he purchased on his account and the same ratified by the plaintiff. However, later, the Plaintiff refused to purchase the same. The court held that  Plaintiff will not be liable as Robert does not purchase wheat on his behalf, and thus, ratification is ineffective.

2.      The second essential advocates that the principal must be physically existent and competent to the contract.  In the case of Kelner v. Baxter, the promoter of the company agreed on behalf of the non-existent later ratified after established. The Court held such ratification to be ineffective.

3.      The second essential discussed under Section 197 of the Indian Contract  Act, 1872, which states that  Ratification can be made either through expessed word or writing or through implied conducts and circumstances.

4.      The third essential condition under Section 198  of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, which advocates that the person making the ratification must have full knowledge of all the facts and circumstances of all the actions of the agent.

5.       According to  Section 199, Ratification always be made of the transactions in order to preclude the Principal to just ratify those part favourable for his interest.

6.      Section 200 explicitly advocates that the act of ratification must not in any way be harmful or injurious to the interest of the third party. In case of a contrary, the ratification will be considered as invalid.

7.       The last essential of ratification is that the act of ratification must be completed in a reasonable time to protect the interest of the third party from long and unjustified delays.

4.5  Exercising Authority by presumption of Husband-wife relationship:

Marriage is not itself establish relationship or contract of agency. But, the contract of agency is established when a man and woman live together and they showcase themselves as husband and wife in the eyes of third person. A woman or wife can bind his husband responsible for all her actions like an authorised agent.

5         Conclusion:

From the above discussion, it can be deduced that  Contract is one of the most important requirements of the present commercial world and to meet the need of such complex area of interest there should be well established procedure to govern it. Modes of creating the agency is the perfect testimony of the same procedure which assist the agent to bind the principal of all the justified acts.