Question

Principle: When, at the desire one person, any other person has done or abstained from doing something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise.
Facts: X, the uncle of Y, made a promise to pay him an amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- as reward if Y quits smoking and drinking within one year. Y quit smoking and drinking within six months.

• A. Consideration has moved from the side of X.
• B. Consideration has moved from the side of Y.
• C. No consideration has moved from the side of Y.
• D. Quitting smoking and drinking cannot be a consideration.

Hint:

In contracts, the consideration must be something of value provided by one party to the other. Here, Y’s act of quitting smoking and drinking fulfills that role.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

The principle clearly states that consideration is the act of doing something (or abstaining from doing something) at the desire of the other party. In this case, Y quit smoking and drinking at the request of X. Y’s quitting of smoking and drinking is the consideration moving from Y for the promise made by X. The consideration is not moving from X, as it is not an act on X’s part but a request to Y that has been fulfilled.
Thus, the correct answer is (B). Option (A) is incorrect because consideration came from Y. Option (C) is incorrect because there was valid consideration. Option (D) is incorrect because quitting smoking and drinking is an acceptable consideration.

Answer 2

This question tests who is supplying the consideration in a unilateral reward-style promise. Let's work through each option.

1. Consideration has moved from the side of X: X only made a promise and did not himself do or abstain from doing anything at anyone else's desire. X is the promisor, not the party supplying the consideration, so this option misidentifies the source.
2. Consideration has moved from the side of Y: The principle defines consideration as an act or abstinence done at the desire of another person, in return for a promise. Here, X desired that Y quit smoking and drinking, and Y did exactly that. Y's abstinence, done at X's request and in response to X's promise, is the consideration, and it flows from Y.
3. No consideration has moved from the side of Y: This is factually incorrect. Y's quitting of smoking and drinking, done at X's desire, squarely fits the definition of consideration under the principle, so consideration clearly did move from Y.
4. Quitting smoking and drinking cannot be a consideration: The principle does not restrict what kind of act or abstinence qualifies; any abstinence done at another's desire suffices, and giving up a habit is exactly the sort of abstinence the definition contemplates.

Because Y abstained from smoking and drinking specifically at X's desire and in exchange for X's promise, that abstinence is the consideration, and it comes from Y's side.

Therefore, the correct answer is Consideration has moved from the side of Y.

Answer 3

The principle's definition of consideration has three parts: an act or abstinence, done at the desire of another person, in connection with a promise. Checking who satisfies each part here helps sort the options.

1. Consideration has moved from the side of X: For this to hold, X would need to be the one performing an act or abstinence at someone's desire. X only made the promise itself, he neither did anything nor gave up anything at Y's request, so X fails the very first part of the definition, an act or abstinence on his part.
2. Consideration has moved from the side of Y: Y quit smoking and drinking, that is the abstinence. It was done at X's desire, since X asked for exactly this in exchange for the reward. And it was tied to X's promise of Rs. 1,00,000. All three parts of the definition, abstinence, at another's desire, connected to a promise, are satisfied by Y's conduct.
3. No consideration has moved from the side of Y: This denies that Y's abstinence counts at all, but Y's quitting fits every part of the definition, an abstinence, done at X's desire, linked to X's promise, so there is no basis to say Y supplied nothing.
4. Quitting smoking and drinking cannot be a consideration: This challenges the first part of the definition itself, whether abstinence from a habit counts as an abstinence at all. The principle does not limit the kind of abstinence that qualifies, and giving up a habit is a plain instance of abstaining from something, so this option adds a restriction the definition never contains.

Matching Y's conduct against every part of the definition, an abstinence, at X's desire, linked to X's promise, confirms the consideration comes from Y.

Therefore, the correct answer is Consideration has moved from the side of Y.