Section 191 defines a 'sub-agent' as a person employed by, and acting under the control of, the original agent in the business of the agency, establishing the statutory criteria that distinguish a sub-agent from a substituted agent.
Employment by Original Agent: The sub-agent is engaged and appointed directly by the intermediate agent, rather than being engaged directly by the ultimate principal.
Subjection to Agent's Control and Direction: The sub-agent remains subject to the continuous supervision, control, and instruction of the original agent throughout the discharge of the agency business.
Deployment in the Business of Agency: The sub-agent is deployed to carry out tasks, transactions, or services that form part of the principal's original mandate entrusted to the agent.
Key Landmark Precedents:
Union of India v. Amar Singh AIR 1960 SC 233: The Supreme Court analyzed the definition of sub-agent under Section 191 in the context of interconnected railway carriers, distinguishing between sub-agents under the agent's control and independently appointed connecting carriers.
Calico Printers' Association v. Barclays Bank (1931) 145 LT 51: The Court held that an entity employed by a collecting bank to carry out instructions abroad acted as a sub-agent under Section 191, subject to the control of the appointing bank without direct privity with the customer.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:
Determining whether an intermediary is a 'sub-agent' under Section 191 or a 'substituted agent' under Section 194 is critical. The litmus test is control: if the person reports to and is controlled by the agent, he is a sub-agent under Section 191; if he is named to act directly for the principal and steps into direct privity with the principal, he is a substituted agent under Section 194.
Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 191
Section 191 defines a 'sub-agent' as a person employed by, and acting under the control of, the original agent in the business of the agency, establishing the statutory criteria that distinguish a sub-agent from a substituted agent.
Determining whether an intermediary is a 'sub-agent' under Section 191 or a 'substituted agent' under Section 194 is critical. The litmus test is control: if the person reports to and is controlled by the agent, he is a sub-agent under Section 191; if he is named to act directly for the principal and steps into direct privity with the principal, he is a substituted agent under Section 194.