Case Name: Sushil Kumar Mehta vs Gobind Ram Kairon
In the landmark Supreme Court case of Sushil Kumar Mehta vs Gobind Ram Kairon, it was established that contracts entered into with explicit parental consent can be enforceable against parents in India.

Background:
The case involved a contract entered into by a minor with the explicit consent of his father. The minor later sought to avoid the contract, arguing that he was not bound by it as he was a minor. The issue before the court was whether a contract entered into with the consent of a parent could be enforced against the parent.

Ruling:
The Supreme Court held that a contract entered into by a minor with the explicit consent of his parent was binding on the parent. The court reasoned that when a parent gives consent for a minor to enter into a contract, the parent is essentially acting as the guardian of the minor and is bound by the terms of the contract.

Implications:
This ruling has significant implications for contracts entered into with minors in India. It clarifies that contracts entered into with the explicit consent of parents can be enforced against parents, providing more certainty and security for parties entering into such contracts. It also highlights the importance of parental consent in such transactions to ensure enforceability.