B lesson 3
BRF
Lesson 3
CONSENT
According
to Section 13 of the Act has defined consent as “two or more persons are said
to consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense”. According to
this section which has laid down the basic principle of consensus ad idem on which
the law of contract is based, the parties to an agreement should have identity
of minds regarding the subject matter of the agreement.
FREE
CONSENT
If
the consent is there but it is not free or real, then the contract will be
voidable at the option of the aggrieved parties whose consent is not free. The
word “free consent” is defined in Section 14 of
the
Contract Act as follows –
“Consent
is said to be free when it is not caused by
1.
Coercion, as defined in Section 15; or
2.
Undue influence as defined in Section
16; or
3.
Fraud, as defined in Section 17; or
4.
Misrepresentation, as defined in
Section 18; or
5.
Mistake, subject to the provisions of
Sections 20, 21 and 22.
Consent
is said to be so caused when it would not have been given but for the existence
of such coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake”.
COERCION
[SEC. 15]
Coercion
means compelling or forcing a person to enter into a contract under a pressure
or threat.
Section
15 of the Indian Contract Act defines coercion as “the committing or
threatening to commit, any act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code, or the
unlawful detaining, or threatening to detain, any property, to the prejudice of
any person whatsoever, with the intention of causing any person to enter into
an agreement”.
Example:
X beats Y and compels him to sell his
car for Rs. 50,000. Here, Y’s consent has been obtained by coercion because
beating someone is an offence under the Indian Penal Code.
ESSENTIALS
CHARACTERISTICS OF COERCION
(a)
The committing of any act forbidden by Indian Penal Code:
When the consent of a person is obtained by committing any act which is
forbidden by the Indian Penal Code, the consent is said to be obtained by
coercion.
(b)
The threatening to commit any act forbidden by Indian Penal Code: If
a person attempts to commit an act which is punishable under the Indian Penal
Code, it leads to coercion, e.g., consent obtained at the pistol point, or by
threatening to cause death or by intimidation.
(c)
The unlawful detaining of any property: If a person
unlawfully detains the property of another person and forces him to enter into
a contract, the consent is said to be induced by coercion.
(d)
The threatening to detain any property unlawfully: If
a threat is given to detain any property of another person, this amount to
coercion.
(e)
The act of coercion: It must be done with the object of
inducing or compelling any person to enter into an agreement.
EFFECTS
OF COERCION
According
to Section 19 states that, ‘when the consent of a party to an agreement is
obtained by coercion, the contract becomes voidable at the option of the party,
i.e., such party can put an end to the contract if he so chooses’.
According
to Section 72 of the Act, which is based on the principle of equitable
restitution, a person to whom anything has been delivered or money paid under
coercion must return or repay it.
UNDUE
INFLUENCE [SEC. 16]
When
a party enters into a contract under any kind of mental pressure, unfair
influence or persuasion by the superior
party, the undue influence is said to be employed. According to Section 16 (1)
of the Act, a contract is said to be induced by undue influence, “where the
relations subsisting between the parties are such that one of the parties is in
a position to dominate the will of the other, and uses that position to obtain
an unfair advantage over the other”.
Presumption
of undue influence
Section
16 (2), a person is deemed to be in a position to dominate the will of the
other is the following cases:
a)
Real or apparent authority: Where he
holds a real or apparent authority over the other, e.g., master and the
servant, parent and child, Income Tax officer and assessee, etc.
b)
Fiduciary relationship: Fiduciary relation
means a relation of mutual trust and confidence, e.g., guardian and the ward,
solicitor and client, doctor and patient, guru and disciple, trustees
and
beneficiaries, etc.
c)
Mental distress: Where he contracts with a person whose
mental capacity is temporarily or permanently affected by reason of age,
illness, or mental or bodily distress.
BURDEN
OF PROOF [SEC. 16 (3)]
Where
a person who is in a position to dominate the will of another, makes a contract
and the transaction appears to be unconscionable, the burden of proving that
the contract has not been induced by undue influence shall lie on the person
who is in a position to dominate the will of the other.
The
presumption of undue influence can be rebutted or opposed by showing the
following:
(i)
that full disclosure of all material
facts was made;
(ii)
that the consideration was adequate.
FRAUD
[Sec. 17]
The
term ‘fraud’ may be defined as an intentional, deliberate or wilful
misstatement of facts, which are material for the formation of a contract.
According
to Section 17, “fraud means and includes any of the following acts committed
by a party to a contract or with his connivance or by his agent, with intent to
deceive another party thereto or his agent, or to induce him to enter into the
contract:
(a)
the suggestion, as to a fact, of that
which is not true, by one who does not believe it to be true;
(b)
the active concealment of a fact by one
having knowledge or belief of the fact;
(c)
a promise made without any intention of
performing it;
(d)
any other act fitted to deceive;
(e)
any such act or omission as the law
specially declares to be fraudulent”.
ELEMENTS
OF FRAUD
On
the basis of aforesaid definition of fraud, the essential elements of fraud are
as follows:
1.
The act must have been committed by a party to the contract: The
fraud must be committed by a party to a contract or by anyone with his
connivance or by his agent. Thus, the fraud by a stranger to the contract does
not affect the validity of the contract.
2.
Acts committed may be of the following nature:
a)
Suggestion of an untrue fact: If a person
knowingly states an untrue fact or fact which he does not believe to be true,
it will be taken as a fraud on his part.
b)
Active concealment of a fact: An active
concealment is considered as a fraud when (i) there is a concealment of fact,
and (ii) the concealment is active (i.e., all efforts are made to
conceal
fact), and (iii) the concealment is made by a party who has the knowledge of
it.
c)
A promise made without any intention of performing it: If
a party while entering into a contract has no intention to perform his promise,
it will be taken as a fraud on his part.
d)
Any other act fitted to deceive: The
expression ‘act fitted to deceive’ means any act which is done with the obvious
intention of committing fraud. Thus, this clause covers all tricks and unfair
ways which are used by cunning and clever people to cheat others.
e)
Any such act or omission which the law specially declares to be fraudulent: Under
theTransfer of Property Act, any transfer of immovable property with the
intention of defrauding the creditors, is taken as a fraud.
3.
The act must have been committed with the intention of inducing the deceived
party to act upon it: It implies that the
assertion should be such that it would necessarily influence and induce the
other party to act.
4.
The act must have in fact deceived the other party: If
a person has committed a fraudulent act to deceive the other party, but the
other party has not been actually deceived by his act, it will not be taken as
a fraud on his part.
5.
Plaintiff must have suffered: There is no
fraud without damages, and therefore, to constitute fraud it is necessary that
the plaintiff must have suffered some loss of money or money’s worth or some
other tangible detriment capable of assessment.
Mere
silence is not a fraud
According
to explanation to Section 17, “mere silence as to facts likely to affect the
willingness of a person to enter into a contract is not fraud”.
Example:
A sells, by auction, to B a horse which
A knows to be unsound. A says nothing to B about the horse’s unsoundness. This
is not fraud by A.
Exceptions
1.
Duty to Speak: Mere silence amounts to fraud when the
person keeping silent, is under a duty to speak. The duty to speak arises,
where one party reposes trust and confidence in the other.
The
duty to speak arises in the following types of contracts:
Contracts uberrimae fidei, i.e.,
contracts of good faith such as contracts of insurance; contracts for the sale
of immovable properties; contracts of marriage Contracts of partnership Contracts
of guarantee etc.
2.
Where silence is equivalent to speech: For
instance, B says to A, "If you do not deny it, I shall presume that the
horse is sound". A says nothing. Here A’s silence is equivalent to speech.
If the horse turns out to be vicious A can be held liable for fraud.
Effect
of Fraud
1.
Right to rescind the contract: The party
whose consent was caused by fraud can rescind (cancel) the contract but he
cannot do so in the following cases:
a)
where silence amounts to fraud, the
aggrieved party cannot rescind the contract if he had the means of discovering
the truth with ordinary diligence;
b)
where the party after becoming aware of
the fraud takes a benefit under the contract;
c)
where an innocent third party before
the contract is rescinded acquires for consideration some interest in the
property passing under the contract;
d)
where the parties cannot be restored to
their original position.
2. Right to insist upon performance: The
party whose consent was caused by fraud may, if he thinks fit, insist that the
contract shall be performed and that he shall be put in the position in which
he would have been if the representation made had been true.
3.
Right to claim damages: The party whose consent
was caused by fraud, can claim damage if he suffers some loss.
MISREPRESENTATION
[Sec. 18]
The
term ‘Misrepresentation’ means a false representation of fact made innocently
of a material fact without any intention to deceive the other party. A false
representation made by a person may be either:
According
to Section 18 defines the term ‘misrepresentation’ as follows:
“Misrepresentation”
means and includes –
i)
the positive assertion, in a manner not
warranted by the information of the person making it, of that which is not
true, though he believes it to be true;
ii)
any breach of duty which, without any
intent to deceive, gains an advantage to the person committing it, or anyone
claiming under him, by misleading another to his prejudice, or to the prejudice
of any one claiming under him;
iii)
Causing, however innocently, a party to
an agreement, to make a mistake as to the substance of the thing which is the
subject of the agreement.
Essentials
of Misrepresentation
1.
There must be a representation or
breach of duty.
2.
The representation must be of facts
material to the contract.
3.
The representation must be untrue.
4.
The representation must be made with a
view to inducing the other party to enter into contract.
5.
The other party must have acted on the
faith of the representation.
6.
The person making the representation
honestly believes it to be true.
Thus
misrepresentation may be committed in any of the following ways:
1.
Unwarranted Statements: If a person
makes a statement of fact which is not warranted by his information, he is said
to make a misrepresentation.
2.
Breach of Duty: When a person commits a breach of duty
without any intention to deceive the other party and thereby gains something
while the other party loses, it will be termed as misrepresentation.
3.
Inducing Mistake about Subject Matter: If a
party to an agreement induces the other party, although innocently to commit a
mistake as to the nature or quality of the subject matter of the
agreement,
he becomes guilty of misrepresentation.
Effects
of Misrepresentation
The
effect of misrepresentation is that it makes the contract voidable the option
of the party whose consent is so obtained. And such party may put an end to the
contract if he so chooses.
Exceptions
1.
Where the other party had the means of discovering the truth with ordinary
diligence: The party cannot complain of
misrepresentation if he had the means of discovering the truth with
ordinary
means.
2.
Where the misrepresentation does not induce the other party to enter into
contract, the contract is not voidable: If
the consent is given independently in spite of misrepresentation, the contract
is not voidable.
Difference
between Fraud and Misrepresentation
Fraud
Misrepresentation
1.
There is misstatement of concealment of
fact, deliberately made with the intention to deceive the others party or to
induce him to enter into a contract. 1. The misstatement of fact is made
innocently without any bad intention.
2.
The fraud is intentional or wilful
wrong. The person making an untrue statement knows that it is not true. 2. The
misrepresentation is an innocent wrong. The person making the false statement
believes it to be true.
3.
In case of active fraud, the aggrieved
party in addition to the
normal
remedies can claim also damages. 3. The aggrieved party cannot rescind
the contract if he had the means of discovering the truth.
4.
A fraud is a criminal act too. 4. It
is not a criminal act.
MISTAKE
A
mistake is said to have occurred where the parties intending to do one thing by
error do something else. Mistake is an erroneous belief concerning something.
Kinds
of Mistake
Mistake
may be of two kinds: (I) Mistake of Law; and (II) Mistake of Fact.
(I)
Mistake of Law: It may be of the following types:
a)
Mistake of law of the country: It does not
render the agreement void. This is based on the well
established
rule of law namely, ignorantia juris non excusat (i.e., ignorance of law is no
excuse).
Section
21 lays down that "a contract is not voidable because it was caused by a
mistake as to any law in force in India".
b)
Mistake of foreign law: The mistake
of the foreign law has the same effect as a mistake of fact.
Therefore,
it renders the agreement void. Section 21 lays down that “a mistake as to a law
not in force in India has the same effect as a mistake of fact”.
(II)
Mistake of Fact: Mistake of fact may be of two types –
(1)
Bilateral mistake; and
(2)
Unilateral mistake.
(1)
Bilateral mistake: Where both the parties to an agreement
are under a mistake as to matter of fact essential to the agreement, the
agreement is void. An agreement shall be void if the following conditions are
satisfied:
(i)
Both the parties must be under a mistake: This
means the mistake must be mutual or common.
(ii)
Mistake must relate to an essential fact: It
is necessary that the mistake must relate to a matter of fact which is
essential to the agreement.
Types
of Bilateral Mistake
The
following types of bilateral mistake, which render the agreement void, are
important from the subject point of view:e
a)
Mistake as to subject matter
Where
both the parties working under a mistake relating to the subject matter of
contract, the contract is void. It may be of the following types:
(i)
Mistake regarding existence of the subject
matter: Where both the parties are under a mistake regarding the existence of
the subject matter, the contract is void.
(ii)
Mistake regarding identity of the
subject matter: If both, the parties are mistaken about the identity of subject
matter, the contract shall be void.
(iii)
Regarding the title to the subject
matter: If a person buys some property which neither party knew that it already
belonged to the buyer, the contract will be void.
(iv)
Regarding the quantity of the subject
matter: Where the quantity purchased is fundamentally, different from the
quantity intended to be sold, there occurs mutual mistake which prevents the
formation of an enforceable contract.
(v)
Regarding the quality of the subject
matter: It occurs, where the subject matter is entirely different from that
contemplated by the parties.
(vi)
Regarding the price of the subject
matter: Where a seller while writing the price of the goods intending to write
Rs. 2,250 by mistake writes Rs. 1250, the agreement is void.
b)
Mistake as to the possibility of performance
Where
the parties to an agreement believe that the agreement is capable of
performance, while in fact it is not so, the agreement is treated as void. The
impossibility may either be physical or legal.
(2)Unilateral
mistake
The
term unilateral mistake means where only one party to the agreement is under a
mistake. A contract is not voidable merely because it was caused by one of the
parties to it being under a
mistake
as to matter of fact.
Types
of Unilateral Mistake
1.
Mistake about the identity of the parties to an agreement: If
there is a mistake regarding the identity of the person contracted with, even
if the mistake is caused by fraud or misrepresentation of another party, the
contract will be void.
2.
Mistake about the nature of the agreement: If a
party does not disclose the true nature of the document but fraudulently
induces the other party to sign it who believes that he is signing some other
document, in such a case there is no real agreement.
No comments:
Post a Comment