Here, the defendant was a minor who obtained a loan from the applicant by presenting his age wrong. Subsequently, the complainant filed a complaint on the grounds that the minor was responsible for the fraud and that he would be compelled, after fairness, to restore the money. However, the Court considered that the obligation for the minor to pay an equivalent amount out of his current and future resources would amount to the performance of a void contract and was therefore not possible even if the child concluded the contract through fraud. If the seller makes the remedies available in the event of a defect, a number of considerations determine the nature and extent of the remedies made available to the buyer. In each case of default, two critical things must be taken into account: if the time is not fixed, the res vendita must be made available immediately (if the service is possible at the time of sale) or within a reasonable time (if the process must necessarily take time). The circumstance of each contract determines what is a reasonable time. A seller who did not provide the thing sold at the right time is in Mora.  The second factor concerns the strength of the mind. Consent is considered as a maintenance of reason, which must be linked to reflection. It is possible for a person to behave normally, but he cannot understand the transaction and therefore not be able to make a rational judgment, which leads to the insolidicity of the mind. According to section 12 of the Act, a person is considered a sound mind when he is able to understand at the time of entering into the contract and to render a rational judgment. This implies that a person who is usually of unhealthy mind and partly of healthy mind, then he should enter into a contract if he is of a healthy mind, and if it is the other way around, then the person should avoid making a contract if he is of an unhealthy mind.
The insolide spirit leads to the treaty continuing to be invalidated. But the reason is in favor of that person, which implies the ability to understand and make rational decisions about his interests. For example, if one person of the other claims that the person has become unable to understand their affairs due to age, it is up to the person to prove the insolidity of the other`s mind. The power of a court to grant remedies is the final sanction against non-performance and, unless the defendant is in default, the objective is to obtain full compensation from the innocent party, as if the contract were fulfilled. This remedy to protect “expectations” is an essential distinction between contracts as obligations arising from an unlawful act or abusive enrichment. . . .