Home  /  Indian Contract Act  /  Section 136

Section 136: Surety not discharged when agreement made with third person to give time to principal debtor

Indian Contract Act • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1872
Section 135 All 266 Sections of Indian Contract Act Section 137

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 136

Section 136 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 creates a statutory exception to the rule discharging sureties on extension of time, enacting that where the creditor enters into an agreement to give time to the principal debtor with a third party stranger rather than with the debtor himself, the surety is not discharged. This rule preserves the surety's liability because an agreement with a stranger does not prevent the surety from paying the debt and immediately suing the principal debtor.

  • Tripartite vs Third-Party Agreement: To discharge a surety under Section 135, the binding agreement to give time must be made between the creditor and the principal debtor; an agreement made with an outside third person leaves the debtor's immediate liability intact.
  • Preservation of Surety's Right to Pay and Sue: Because the agreement with a third party does not bind or empower the principal debtor, the surety's equitable right to pay the creditor at maturity and proceed immediately against the debtor is unimpaired.
  • Absence of Legal Estoppel Against Debtor: The principal debtor cannot plead the third-party agreement as a defense against an immediate demand, ensuring the surety suffers no prejudice in law.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Frazer v. Jordan (1857) 8 E&B 303: Classic common law precedent codified in Section 136, holding that an agreement between the holder of a bill of exchange and a third party stranger to give time to the acceptor does not discharge the drawer or endorsers, because the holder has not disabled himself from suing the acceptor if the surety pays.
  • Clarke v. Birley (1889) 41 Ch D 422: Affirmed that an arrangement with a third person to stay execution or afford indulgence to the debtor does not operate as an agreement with the debtor himself, keeping the guarantor's statutory obligations intact.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In corporate debt restructuring where a parent company or investor enters into a standstill arrangement with a bank, examine whether the standstill agreement was executed by the borrower or solely by the third-party investor. If executed with a third party, the bank can successfully invoke Section 136 to defeat the guarantor's discharge argument.

Section 135 All 266 Sections of Indian Contract Act Section 137