Contract

Unless all the three parties are there in a contract and agree to the contents thereof, it cannot be called a Tripartite Agreement at all.

Dear Mr. Ramachandran,

When all the 3 parties have signed the contract it would mean that they have agreed to its contents. My question is that if only 2 parties have some obligation under the contract and the third has merely signed it as an associate of one of the parties, can it be treated as a tripartite agreement. My understanding is that it can't be. Want to have views of the other learned members of the forum.

Regards

Dear Mr. Amardeep,

There should be agreement by the parties concerned that such and such action if done by say XYZ would be acceptable to ABC etc.  Mere signing of the agreement without clearly agreeing to the terms contained in the Agreement would not bind the party.  In any case, in these sort of matters unless one goes through the entire agreement, it is very difficult to say one way or the other.   

Dear Mr. Ramachandran,

The term "agreement" itself means that parties have accepted the terms and conditions recorded therein. I am not able to visualise a situation where parties to an agreement would simply sign the same without agreeing to it.

Dear Mr.Amardeep,

If you had been so sure, you would not have posed the query in the first place.  Isn't it?

Just by signing, if none of the terms bind me, what is the use.  All that i am saying is that if there are explicit terms and conditions where ABC accepts that if anything is settled with XYZ is acceptable including for the services etc., rendered by ABC then it is ok.  Without such binding / connecting terms in the agreement, mere signing that so and so is an Associate of so and so will have no binding effect.  It is my understanding.  I wish I am wrong!

Dear Mr. Ramachandran,

First of all it wasn't a query it was a thread for discussion. Secondly the question is not whether the agreement is binding or not. I have not given any indication in the thread that any party has disputed the terms of the agreement. My question is on the interpretation based on the given facts.  I wish I could have made it more clear.