Indian Contract Act
Indian Contract Act
Agreement
As per Section 2(e) of the Indian Contract Act "every promise and every set of promises, forming the consideration
for each other, is an agreement”.
An analysis of the definition given above reveals the following characteristics of an agreement:
i. Plurality of persons: There must be two or more persons to make an agreement because one person cannot
enter into an agreement with himself.
ii. Consensus ad idem: The meeting of the minds is called consensus-ad- idem. It means both the parties to an
agreement must agree about the subject matter of the agreement in the same sense and at the same time.
Obligation
Section 2(b) says that when the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is
said to be accepted; and a proposal when accepted becomes a promise.
Agreements which are not Contracts
Agreements in which the idea of bargain is absent and there is no intention to create legal relations are not contracts.
These are:
a. Agreements relating to social matters: An agreement between two persons to go together to the cinema, or
for a walk, does not create a legal obligation on their part to abide by it. Similarly, if I promise to buy you a dinner and
break that promise, I do not expect to be liable to legal penalties. There cannot be any offer and acceptance to
hospitality.
b. Domestic arrangements between husband and wife: In Balfour v. Balfour (1919) 2 KB 571, a husband working in
Ceylone, had agreed in writing to pay a housekeeping allowance to his wife living in England. On receiving
information that she was unfaithful to him, he stopped the allowance: Held, he was entitled to do so. This was
a mere domestic arrangement with no intention to create legally binding relations. Therefore, there was no
contract.
Three consequences follow from the above discussion.
(i) To constitute a contract, the parties must intend to create legal relationship.
(ii) The law of contract is the law of those agreements which create obligations, and those obligations which have
their source in agreement.
(iii) Agreement is the genus of which contract is the specie and, therefore, all contracts are agreements but all
agreements are not contracts.
ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF A VALID CONTRACT
Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 provides that "all agreements are contracts if they are made by -the free
consent of parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and are not hereby
expressly declared to be void".
a) Void Agreement
A void agreement is one which is destitute of all legal effects. It cannot be enforced and confers no rights on
either party. It is really not a contract at all, it is non-existent. Technically the words 'void contract' are a
contradiction in terms. But the expression provides a useful label for describing the situation that arises when a
'contract' is claimed but in fact does not exist. For example, a minors contract is void.
b) Voidable Contract
A voidable contract is one which a party can put to an end. He can exercise his option, if his consent was not free.
The contract will, however be binding, if he does not exercise his option to avoid it within a reasonable time.
(c) Illegal Agreement
An illegal agreement is one which, like the void agreement has no legal effects as between the immediate parties.
Further, transactions collateral to it also become tainted with illegality and are, therefore, not
enforceable.
For example, one party may have deceived the other party, or in some other way there may be no genuine
consent. The parties may be labouring under a mistake, or one or both the parties may be incapable of making a
contract. Again, the agreement may be illegal or physically impossible. All these are called "the FLAWS in contract
or the VICES of contract".
The chief flaws in contract are:
i. Incapacity
ii. Mistake
iii. Misrepresentation
iv. Fraud
v. Undue Influence
vi. Coercion
vii. llegality
viii. Impossibility
i. Flaw in Capacity—Capacity and Persons
In law, persons are either natural or artificial. Natural persons are human beings and artificial persons are
corporations. Contractual capacity or incapacity is an incident of personality.
The general rule is that all natural persons have full capacity to make binding contracts. But the Indian Contract Act,
1872 admits an exception in the case of:
i. Minors
ii. lunatics, and
iii. persons disqualified from contracting by any law to which they are subject.
Minor's Contract
According to the Indian Majority Act, 1875, a minor is a person, male or female, who has not completed the age of
18 yeas In case a guardian has been appointed to the minor or where the minor is under the guardianship of the Court
of Wards, the person continues to be a minor until he completes his age of 21 yeas. According to the Indian Contract
Act, no person is competent to enter into a contract who is not of the age of majority. It was finally laid down by the
Privy Council in the leading case of Mohiri Bibi v. Dharmodas Ghose, (1903) 30 Cal. 539, that a minor
6 BUSINESS LAW | Mohit Educomp Pvt. Ltd.
has no capacity to contract and minors contract is absolutely void. In this case, X, a minor borrowed ` 20,000 from Y,
a money lender. As a security for the money advanced, X executed a mortgage in Y's favour. When sued by Y, the
Court held that the contract by X was void and he cannot be compelled to repay the amount advanced by him.
The following points must be kept in mind with respect to minors contract:
a. A minor's contract is altogether void in law, and a minor cannot bind himself by a contract.
b. Since the contract is void ab initio, it cannot be ratified by the minor on attaining the age of majority)
c. Estoppel is an important principle of the law of evidence.
d.A minors estate is liable to pay a reasonable price for necessaries supplied to him or to anyone whom the minor is
bound to support (Section 68 of the Act)
e. An agreement by a minor being void, the Court will never direct specific performance of the contract
f.A minor can be an agent, but he cannot be a principal nor can he be a partner. He can, however, be admitted
to the benefits of a partnership
g. Since a minor is never personally liable, he cannot be adjudicated as an insolvent.
h.An agreement by a parent or guardian entered into on behalf of the minor is binding on him provided it is for his
benefit or is for legal necessity.
Lunatics Agreement (Section 2)
A person of unsound mind is a lunatic. That is to say for the purposes of making contract, a person is of
unsound mind if at the time when he makes the contract, he is incapable of understanding it and of forming rational
judgment as to its effect upon his interests.
A person unsound mind cannot enter into a contract. A lunatics agreement is therefore void. But if he makes a
contract when he is of sound mind, i.e., during lucid intervals, he will be bound by it.
Persons Disqualified from Entering into Contract
Alien Enemies
A person who is not an Indian citizen is an alien. An alien may be either an alien friend or a foreigner whose
sovereign or State is at peace with India, has usually contractual capacity of an Indian citizen. On the declaration of
war between his country and India he^ becomes an alien enemy. A contract with an alien enemy becomes
unenforceable on the outbreak of war.
Foreign Sovereigns and Ambassadors
Professional Persons
In England, barristers-at law are prohibited by the etiquette of their profession from suing for their fees. So
also are the Fellow and Members of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons.
Corporations
A corporation is an artificial person created by law, e.g., a company registered under the Companies Act,
public bodies created by statute, such as Municipal Corporation of Delhi. A corporation exists only in contemplation of
law and has no physical shape or form.
The Indian Contract Act does not speak about the capacity of a corporation to enter into a contract. But if properly
incorporated, it has a right to enter into a contract. It can sue and can be sued in its own name. There are some
contracts into which a corporation cannot enter without its seal, and others not at all. A company, for instance,
cannot contract to marry. Further, its capacity and powers to contract are limited by its charter or memorandum of
association. Any contract beyond such power in ultra vires and void.
Married Women
In India there is no difference between a man and a woman regarding contractual capacity. A woman married or
single can enter into contracts in the same ways as a man. She can deal with her property in any manner she likes,
provided, of course, she is a major and is of sound mind.
Mohit Educomp Pvt. Ltd. | BUSINESS LAW 7
Flaw in Consent
Effect of Mistake
A mistake must be a "vital operative mistake", i.e. it must be a mistake of fact which is fundamental to contract.
To be operative so as to render the contract void, the mistake must be:
A.For example, where A is induced to enter into an illegal agreement by the fraud of B, A may recover the money
paid if he did not know that the contract was illegal.
B. If the plaintiff can frame a cause of action entirely dependent of the contract.
C.Where a substantial part of the illegal transaction has not been carried out and the plaintiff is truly and genuinely
repentant.
The following agreement are void as being against public policy but they are not illegal:
a.Agreement in restrain of parental rights: An agreement by which a party deprives himself of the custody of his child
is void.
b.Agreement in restraint of marriage: An agreement not to marry at all or not to marry any particular person or
class of persons is void as it is in restraint of marriage.
c.Marriage brocage or brokerage Agreements: An agreement.to procure marriage for reward is void. Where a purohit
(priest) was promised ` 200 in consideration of procuring a wife for the defendant, the promise was held void as
opposed to public policy, and the purohit could not recover the promised sum.
d.Agreements in restraint of personal freedom are void: Where a man agreed with his money lender not to change his
residence, or his employment or to part with any of his property or to incur any obligation on credit without the consent
of the money lender, it was held that the agreement was void e.Agreement in restraint of trade: An agreement in
restraint of trade is one which seeks to restrict a person from freely exercising his trade or profession
AGREEMENTS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE VOID
Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act states that every agreement by which any one is restrained from
exercising a lawful profession, trade or business of any kind, is, to that extent, void.
WAGERING AGREEMENTS
The literal meaning of the word "wager" is a "bet". Wagerning agreements are nothing but ordinary betting
agreements. For example, A and B enter into an agreement that if England Cricket Team wins the test match, A will
pay B ` 100 and if it loses B will pay ` 100 to A. This is a wagering agreement and nothing can be recovered by
winning party under the agreement.
The essence of gaming and wagering is that one party is to win and the other to lose upon a future event which at
the time of the contract is of an uncertain nature that is to say, if the event turns out one way A will lose; but if it turns
out the other way he will win.
REVISION
Question 12
What are the circumstances under which an offer gets revoked or lapses?
Question 13
State whether the following statement is correct or incorrect:
A specific offer can be accepted only by that person to whom offer has been made.
Answer
Correct
Question 14
A sends an offer to B to sell his second-car for ` 40,000 with a condition that if B does not reply within a week, he
(A) shall treat the offer as accepted. Is A correct in his proposition? What shall be the position if B communicates his
acceptance after one week?
Answer
Acceptance to an offer cannot be implied merely from the silence of the offeree, even if it is expressly stated
in the offer itself. Unless the offeree has by his previous conduct indicated that his silence amount to
Question 16
A father and daughter agrees to go for a morning walk every day. Is there any agreement in the following
case?
[Hint: No, it is a social agreement]
Question 17
X offers to donate ` 5,000 to a orphanage. The orphanage accepts the offer. Can it recover the amount?
[Hint: No, as the agreement is without consideration and hence void]
Question 18
A sends his servant to trace his missing nephew. In the mean time A announced a reward of ` 1000 who
traces his nephew. The servants traces the nephew. Can servant claim for the reward?
[Hint: No, as communication of offer was not there]
Question 19
Though a void contract is valid when it is made, subsequently it becomes unenforceable. Why?
[Hint: Because of subsequent illegality]
Question 20
A voidable contract is voidable at the option of the aggrieved party and remains valid until rescinded by him.
36 BUSINESS LAW | Mohit Educomp Pvt. Ltd.
Is it correct?
[Hint: Yes]
Question 21
There is a contract to commit crime, what type of contract is this?
[Hint: Illegal Contract]
Question 22
When in a contract due to technical defects, one or both the parties cannot sue upon it, the contract is called..
[Hint: Unenforceable contract]
UNIT – 2: CONSIDERATION
Question 23
X transferred his house to his daughter M by way of gift. The gift deed, executed by X, contained a direction that M
shall pay a sum of f 5,000 per month to N (the sister of the executor.).Consequently M executed an instrument in
favour of N agreeing to pay the said sum. Afterwards, M refused to pay the sum to N saying that she is not liable to N
because no Consideration had moved from her. Decide with reasons under the provisions of the Indian Contract Act,
1872 whether M is liable to pay the said sum to N.
Answer
As per Section 2 (d) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, in India, it is not necessary that consideration must be supplied
by the party, it may be supplied by any other person including a stranger to the transaction.
The problem is based on a case "Chinnaya Vs. Ramayya" in which the Court clearly observed rat the consideration
need not necessarily move from the party itself, it may move from any person. In the given problem, the same reason
applies. Hence, M is liable to pay the said sum to N and cannot deny her liability on the ground that consideration did
not move from N.
Question 24
Mr. Singh, an old man, by a registered deed of gift, granted certain landed property to A, his daughter. By the
terms of the deed, it was stipulated that an annuity of ` 2, 000 should be paid every year to B, who was the
brother of Mr. Singh. On the same day A made a promise to B and executed in his favour an agreement to give
effect to the stipulation. A failed to pay the stipulated sum. In an action against her by B, she contended that
since B had not furnished any consideration, he has no right of action.
Examining the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, decide, whether the contention of A is valid?
Answer
Problem as asked in the question is based on the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 as contained in
section 2(d) and on the principle ‘privity of consideration’. Consideration is one of the essential elements to
make a contract valid and it can flow from the promisee or any other person. In view of the clear language
used in definition of ‘consideration’ in Section 2(d) “…. the promisee or any other person…..”, it is not
necessary that consideration should be furnished by the promisee only. A promise is enforceable if there is
some consideration for it and it is quite immaterial whether it moves from the promisee or any other person. The
leading authority in the decision of the Chinnaya Vs. Ramayya (1882) 4 Mad 137., held that the
consideration can legitimately move from a third party and it is an accepted principle of law in India.
In the given problem, Mr. Singh has entered into a contract with A, but Mr. B has not given any consideration to A
but the consideration did flow from Mr. Singh to A and such consideration from third party is sufficient to the
enforce the promise of A, the daughter, to pay an annuity to
B. Further the deed of gift and the promise made by A to B to pay the annuity were executed simultaneously
and therefore they should be regarded as one transaction and there was sufficient consideration for it.
Thus, a stranger to the contract cannot enforce the contract but a stranger to the consideration may enforce it.
Mohit Educomp Pvt. Ltd. | BUSINESS LAW 37
Question 25
A fire broke out in X’s house. He offered to pay an amount of ` 5,000 to anyone who brought out his trapped son
Y safe. A fireman brought out Y alive. Is X bound to pay?
[Hint: Yes, the fireman had done more than what his official duty demanded]
Question 26
R owed to M ` 5,000. The debt was barred by the Limitation Act. R signed a written promise to pay ` 2,000 to
M on account of this debt. Can M claim it?
[Hint: Yes, as per Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act,1872]
Question 27
R gave his property to his uncle in return of her promise that she would pay ` 2000 P.M. to her uncle all his life.
Later, she refused to pay. Can uncle recover money from him?
[Hint: No, because she gave no promise to the uncle]
Question 28
Study the following example and answer the questions.
(i)A promises to sell his house to B for ` 5,00,000/- Here who is the promisor and who is the promisee?
(ii)B agrees to buy a house from A for ` 5,00,000/- Here who is the promisor and who is the promisee?
[Hints: (i) A (Promisor), B (Promisee)], (ii) B (Promisor), A (Promisee)]
Question 29
A pays ` 5000/- requesting B to deliver certain quantity of rice to which B agrees. What is the position of
consideration as “executed” or “executory” regarding A and B?
[Hints: For ‘A’ executed & for ‘B’ executory]
Question 30
While a third party to consideration can sue, a third party to a contract cannot sue. In the case of family
settlement, if the terms of settlement are reduced in writing, members of the family who were not a party to the
settlement can also enforce the claim. Is it correct?
[Hints: Yes, it is an exception given under Para 1.11 of the study module]
Question 31
Should consideration be adequate to the value of the promise?
[Hints: No, as per the Para 1.10 point (v) of the study module]
(i)Where the vendor of a piece of land told a prospective purchaser that, in his opinion, the land can support 2000 heads
of sheep whereas, in truth, the land could support only 1500 sheep.
(ii)X bought shares in a company on the faith of a prospectus which contained an untrue statement that one Z
was a director of the company. X had never heard of Z and the untrue statement of Z being a director was immaterial
from his point of view. Can X claim damages on grounds of fraud?
(iv)Void Agreement: An agreement in restraint of legal proceedings is void as per Section 28 of the Indian Contract
Act, 1872.
(v) Valid Agreement: An agreement with alien friend is valid, but an agreement with alien enemy is void.
Question 43
A student was induced by his teacher to sell his brand new car to the latter at less than the purchase price
to secure more marks in the examination. Accordingly the car was sold. However, the father of the student
persuaded him to sue his teacher. Can student sue the teacher?
[Hint: Yes, the student can sue his teacher on the ground of undue influence.]
Question 44
A and B enter into a contract believing wrongly that a particular debt is not barred by law of limitation. Is this
a valid contract?
[Hint: Yes, because there is no mistake of fact but of law only]
Question 45
‘A’ & ‘B’ are partners in a firm. They agree to defraud a Government department by submitting a tender in the
individual name and not in the firm name. Is this a valid agreement ?
` 1,50,000/- to A. Later on, F became insolvent and his private assets are sufficient to pay only 1/5th of his
share of debt i.e. ` 10,000/- (1/5 th of ` 50,000/-) (Amount to be contributed by F is ` 50,000/- (1/3rd of `
1,50,000/-). A recovers the whole amount from D through a legal action.
Here, D is entitled to receive
(a) From F’s assets: ` 10,000/-
(b) From E : ` 70,000/- (` 50,000/- being his own share + ½ (50,000 – 10,000) i.e. ` 20,000/- being one
half share of total loss of ` 40,000/- due to F’s insolvency).
Thus, in the above case, under the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, D can recover
` 70,000/- from E.
Question 55
Akhilesh entered into an agreement with Shekhar to deliver him (Shekhar) 5,000 bags to be manufactured in
his factory. The bags could not be manufactured because of strike by the workers and Akhilesh failed to
supply the said bags to Shekhar. Decide whether Akhilesh can be exempted from liability under the provisions of
the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Answer
Delivery of Bags: According to Section 56 (Para 2) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 when the performance of a
contract becomes impossible or unlawful subsequent to its formation, the contract becomes void, this is
termed as ‘supervening impossibility’ (i.e. impossibility which does not exist at the time of making the contract,
but which arises subsequently).
But impossibility of performance is, as a rule, not an excuse from performance. It means that when a person
has promised to do something, he must perform his promise unless the performance becomes absolutely
impossible. Whether a promise becomes absolutely impossible depends upon the facts of each case.
The performance does not become absolutely impossible on account of strikes, lockout and civil disturbances
and the contract in such a case is not discharged unless otherwise agreed by the parties to the contract
(Budget V Bennington; Jacobs V Credit Lyonnais).
In this case Mr. Akhilesh could not deliver the bags as promised because of strike by the worke` This
difficulty in performance cannot be considered as impossible of performance attracting Section 56 (Para 2)