Arvind Datar and breach of promises

ArvindDatar and Moneylife had a wonderful session at the Yacht Club some time back. It was preceded by the launch of Kanga and Palkhiwalla’s latest edition of the Income Tax tome, Datar editing.

Datar started his talk on Corporate Frauds by explaining to the audience what the word ‘fraud’ meant. He said that in terms of a contract, it involved deceit, concealment, an intention not to fulfil an obligation, even silence when disclosure is necessary.

This led us to apply these standards to love and marriage.

The papers  are filled with stories of “rape” as alleged by spurned lovers. Women, thinking that the man is serious enough to culminate their relationship in marriage, have allowed one thing to lead to another. When the truth finally dawns on them, naturally all hell breaks loose.

Congrave, in ‘The Mourning Bride’, used prophetic words when he wrote that“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned”. We bring to you some famous cases of breach of promise and ask you to decide.

YOU BE THE JUDGE.

A)   A man courts a woman for a long time. He asks for her hand in marriage, Mom-in-law being present. The very ‘shy’ miss demurs. In other words, she murmurs not a bit. Dead silence.

B)   A man sends a lady a newspaper cutting with the words, inscribed on it, “READ IT”. The article is an amorous one. The sender of the clipping, however, later refused to marry the girl, denying any amorous intent.

C)   “Call me uncle”, said the gent to the boy, a nephew of a certain maiden. Was this a proposal of marriage? Could it even be considered one?

D)   Some time back this page had carried a story of how a dear old widow was tricked into a scheme of ‘marrying someone rich’. But what about a widower? One such bereaved ex-husband got a lady to pay attention to him. So did he manage with another. Number two was obviously the better filly in the stakes. But the man was devious. He mentioned to the prior love that people “would talk”, the whole episode being so close to his wife’s death. He prepared a draft note and the woman copied it, affixed her signature and was relieved to “find such a gentleman”. The note said that the two were, in effect, meeting as “friends”, and that there was no more to it. When she realised that the widower was now remarried, she sued.

YOU BE THE JUDGE.

On the four cases above. How would you decide in each case? For the woman or the man?

In all the four cases, the courts held for the woman. It decided that there was a distinct breach of promise. It gave new meaning to the saying, ‘led up the garden path’.

Admittedly the cases are old ones and social mores were different. But thinking of what Datar said of corporate promises, one has to recognise that non-disclosure, even of eventual intentions, is an act worthy of punishment. But why is that so?

The law believes, very, very sadly, that people speak the truth. It believes that a person’s word is his bond. And so are his actions. Behaving in a way that induces another to believe a certain thing, and that which is within the knowledge of the person so behaving not to be true, is sufficient to have a court find a breach. It is based on the belief that all persons need to trust their fellowmen. And women. To assume otherwise will be impossible in running a civilised society.

To be sure, men reading this must be thinking of the day when they were jilted by their girlfriends. After all the money spent on the movies,and restaurants, and presents! Technically speaking, a woman who drops a man, after letting him believe of her “true” interest, can and should be sued. But then, men are chivalrous and damsels are so easily hurt. Or at least that is what we were taught to believe.