Write a short note on Garner vs. Murray decision (গাৰ্নাৰ বনাম মাৰেৰ সিদ্ধান্ত)

 

Write a short note on Garner vs. Murray decision (গাৰ্নাৰ বনাম মাৰেৰ সিদ্ধান্ত)

Ans: Garner vs. Murray is a legal decision that pertains to the interpretation of a contract. The case involved a dispute between a buyer and seller of a piece of land, in which the seller had agreed to convey the property with "good and marketable title."

 

The buyer argued that the seller had breached the contract because the property had an easement that was not disclosed prior to the sale. The seller, on the other hand, argued that the term "good and marketable title" did not necessarily exclude the easement.

 

The court ruled in favor of the buyer, stating that the term "good and marketable title" implied that the property was free from any defects or encumbrances that would affect its value or marketability. The court further held that any ambiguity in the contract would be interpreted in favor of the buyer, as the party that did not draft the contract.

 

The Garner vs. Murray decision has had a significant impact on contract law, particularly in cases where there is ambiguity in the language of a contract. The decision reinforces the principle that contracts should be interpreted in a way that is fair to both parties, and that any uncertainty or ambiguity in the language of a contract should be resolved in favor of the party that did not draft the contract.

 

গাৰ্নাৰ বনাম মাৰে হৈছে এটা আইনী সিদ্ধান্ত যিটো চুক্তিৰ ব্যাখ্যাৰ সৈতে জড়িত। এই গোচৰটোত মাটিৰ টুকুৰা ক্ৰেতা আৰু বিক্ৰেতাৰ মাজত বিবাদ হৈছিল, য'ত বিক্ৰেতাই সম্পত্তিটো "ভাল আৰু বজাৰযোগ্য উপাধি"ৰে প্ৰেৰণ কৰিবলৈ সন্মত হৈছিল।

 

ক্ৰেতাই যুক্তি দিছিল যে বিক্ৰেতাই চুক্তি ভংগ কৰিছে কাৰণ সম্পত্তিটোৰ ইজমেণ্ট আছিল যিটো বিক্ৰীৰ পূৰ্বে প্ৰকাশ কৰা হোৱা নাছিল। আনহাতে বিক্ৰেতাই যুক্তি দিছিল যে "ভাল আৰু বজাৰযোগ্য উপাধি" শব্দটোৱে ইজমেণ্টক বাদ দিবই লাগিব বুলি ক'ব নোৱাৰি।

 

আদালতে ক্ৰেতাৰ পক্ষত ৰায়দান কৰি কয় যে "ভাল আৰু বজাৰযোগ্য উপাধি" শব্দটোৱে বুজায় যে সম্পত্তিটো কোনো ধৰণৰ দোষ বা বোজাৰ পৰা মুক্ত যিয়ে ইয়াৰ মূল্য বা বজাৰযোগ্যতাক প্ৰভাৱিত কৰিব। আদালতে আৰু কয় যে চুক্তিখনৰ যিকোনো অস্পষ্টতাক ক্ৰেতাৰ সপক্ষে ব্যাখ্যা কৰা হ’ব, চুক্তিখনৰ খচৰা প্ৰস্তুত নকৰা পক্ষ হিচাপে।

 

বিশেষকৈ চুক্তিৰ ভাষাত অস্পষ্টতা থকা ক্ষেত্ৰত গাৰ্নাৰ বনাম মাৰেৰ সিদ্ধান্তই চুক্তি আইনত যথেষ্ট প্ৰভাৱ পেলাইছে। এই সিদ্ধান্তই এই নীতিক শক্তিশালী কৰে যে চুক্তিসমূহৰ ব্যাখ্যা দুয়োপক্ষৰ বাবে ন্যায্যভাৱে কৰা উচিত, আৰু চুক্তিৰ ভাষাত যিকোনো অনিশ্চয়তা বা অস্পষ্টতা চুক্তিখনৰ খচৰা প্ৰস্তুত নকৰা পক্ষৰ সপক্ষে সমাধান কৰা উচিত।