Please answer the following question based on Indian Contract Act, 1872 –

Sure! Here are short notes on each of the topics based on the Indian Contract Act, 1872:

1. Voidable Contract: A voidable contract is one that is initially valid and enforceable but can
be declared void at the option of one of the parties. This typically occurs when the consent
of one party is obtained through coercion, undue influence, fraud, or misrepresentation. The
aggrieved party has the right to either affirm or reject the contract.

2. Undue Influence: Undue influence occurs when one party is able to dominate the will of
another and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage. This is often seen in
relationships where there is a power imbalance, such as between a guardian and a minor, or
a doctor and a patient. Contracts formed under undue influence are voidable at the option
of the influenced party.

3. Doctrine of Frustration: The doctrine of frustration, covered under Section 56 of the Indian
Contract Act, 1872, applies when an unforeseen event occurs after the formation of a
contract, making its performance impossible or illegal. This doctrine discharges the parties
from their contractual obligations as the contract becomes void due to the impossibility of
performance.

4. Standard Form of Contract: Standard form contracts, also known as adhesion contracts, are
pre-drafted agreements where the terms are set by one party, leaving the other party with
little or no ability to negotiate. These contracts are common in consumer transactions, such
as insurance policies and service agreements. While they offer efficiency, they can also pose
risks due to potential unfair terms.

5. Novation: Novation involves substituting a new contract in place of an existing one, with the
consent of all parties involved. This can occur by changing the parties to the contract or by
altering the terms of the contract. Under Section 62 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872,
novation discharges the original contract and replaces it with a new one.

All the contracts are agreements but all agreementsare not contract. dicuss the essentials of valid
contract in the light of the above statement

The statement "All contracts are agreements, but all agreements are not contracts" highlights a
fundamental principle of contract law under the Indian Contract Act, 1872. To understand this, let's
explore the essentials of a valid contract:

1. Offer and Acceptance:

o There must be a clear offer by one party and an unequivocal acceptance by the
other. This mutual consent forms the basis of an agreement.

2. Intention to Create Legal Relations:

o The parties must intend to enter into a legally binding agreement. Social or domestic
agreements typically lack this intention and are not enforceable as contracts.

3. Lawful Consideration:
 o Consideration refers to something of value exchanged between the parties. It must
be lawful, meaning it should not be illegal, immoral, or against public policy.

4. Capacity to Contract:

o The parties entering into the contract must be competent, meaning they should be
of legal age, of sound mind, and not disqualified by law from contracting.

5. Free Consent:

o Consent must be given freely, without coercion, undue influence, fraud,

misrepresentation, or mistake. If consent is not free, the agreement is voidable at
the option of the aggrieved party.

6. Lawful Object:

o The object of the contract must be lawful. Agreements with illegal or immoral
objectives are void and unenforceable.

7. Certainty and Possibility of Performance:

o The terms of the contract must be clear and certain. Additionally, the performance
of the contract must be possible. Agreements to do impossible acts are void.

8. Not Expressly Declared Void:

o The agreement must not be one that is expressly declared void by the Indian
Contract Act, such as agreements in restraint of trade or marriage.

In summary, while all contracts are agreements because they involve mutual promises, not all
agreements qualify as contracts. Only those agreements that fulfill the above essentials become
enforceable by law and thus are considered contracts under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

(a) Define the term offer (b) explain the essentials of a valid offer giving suitable examples (C)
when does an offer lapse ?

Sure! Let's break down each part of your question based on the Indian Contract Act, 1872:

(a) Define the term offer

An offer (or proposal) is defined under Section 2(a) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. It states: "When
one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view
to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal". In
simpler terms, an offer is an expression of willingness by one party to enter into a contract with
another party on certain terms.

(b) Essentials of a valid offer

For an offer to be valid, it must meet the following essentials:

1. Clear and Definite Terms:

 o The terms of the offer must be clear and definite. For example, if A offers to sell his
car to B for ₹2,00,000, the terms are clear and specific.

2. Communication:

o The offer must be communicated to the offeree. An offer that is not communicated
cannot be accepted. For instance, if A writes a letter offering to sell his house to B,
but the letter is never sent, there is no valid offer.

3. Intention to Create Legal Relations:

o The offer must show an intention to create legal relations. Social or domestic
agreements typically do not have this intention. For example, an invitation to dinner
is not an offer.

4. Certain and Capable of Being Accepted:

o The terms of the offer must be certain and capable of being accepted. Vague offers
cannot form the basis of a contract. For example, an offer to sell "some quantity of
rice" is too vague.

5. Not a Mere Invitation to Offer:

o An offer must be distinguished from an invitation to offer. An invitation to offer is

merely a preliminary step to negotiate or invite offers. For example, a price list or an
advertisement is generally an invitation to offer.

(c) When does an offer lapse?

An offer can lapse under several conditions as per Section 6 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872:

1. By Revocation:

o An offer can be revoked by the offeror at any time before it is accepted by the
offeree. The revocation must be communicated to the offeree.

2. By Lapse of Time:

o If the offer specifies a time limit for acceptance, it lapses after that time. If no time is
specified, it lapses after a reasonable time.

3. By Failure of a Condition Precedent:

o If the offer is conditional and the condition is not fulfilled, the offer lapses.

4. By Death or Insanity:

o The offer lapses if the offeror or the offeree dies or becomes insane before
acceptance.

5. By Rejection:

o If the offeree rejects the offer, it lapses. A counter-offer also constitutes a rejection
of the original offer.

6. By Illegality:

o If the subject matter of the offer becomes illegal before acceptance, the offer lapses.
These principles ensure that offers are clear, communicated, and legally binding, forming the
foundation for valid contracts.

explain Mohiri biwi vs dharmadas ghise case in which minor agreement has been declared void

The case of Mohiri Bibee vs Dharmodas Ghose (1903) is a landmark judgment in Indian contract
law, particularly concerning the capacity of minors to enter into contracts. Here’s a detailed
explanation:

Facts of the Case

Dharmodas Ghose, a minor, mortgaged his property to Brahmo Dutt, a moneylender, through his
agent Kedar Nath, for a sum of ₹20,000. At the time of the mortgage, Dharmodas Ghose was a
minor, and this fact was known to Kedar Nath. Dharmodas Ghose's mother, acting as his legal
guardian, notified Brahmo Dutt about her son's minority. Despite this, the mortgage deed was
executed.

Legal Issues

The primary issues before the court were:

1. Whether the mortgage deed was void under Sections 2, 10, and 11 of the Indian Contract
Act, 1872.

2. Whether Dharmodas Ghose was liable to return the amount of loan received under the
mortgage deed.

Court's Decision

The Privy Council held that:

1. Minor's Capacity to Contract: Under Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a minor is
not competent to contract. Therefore, any agreement entered into by a minor is void ab
initio (from the beginning) and unenforceable.

2. Restitution: The court also addressed whether the minor should return the money received.
It was held that since the contract was void, the principle of restitution (returning the
benefits received) did not apply. The minor was not required to repay the money because
enforcing such a repayment would indirectly validate the void contract.

Significance

This case established the principle that any contract with a minor is absolutely void and not merely
voidable. It clarified that minors are protected under the law from contractual obligations, and any
agreement made with a minor cannot be enforced against them.
what do you understand by legality of object and consideration? state the cases in which the
object and consideration is unlawful

Legality of Object and Consideration

Under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, for a contract to be valid, both the object (purpose) and the
consideration (something of value exchanged) must be lawful. Section 23 of the Act specifies that
the consideration and object of an agreement are lawful unless they:

1. Are forbidden by law: If the object or consideration is prohibited by any law, the contract is
void. For example, a contract to sell narcotics is void because the sale of narcotics is illegal.

2. Are of such a nature that, if permitted, they would defeat the provisions of any law: If the
object or consideration would result in the violation of any law, the contract is void. For
instance, a contract to evade taxes is void.

3. Are fraudulent: If the object or consideration involves fraud, the contract is void. For
example, a contract to defraud a third party is void.

4. Involve or imply injury to the person or property of another: If the object or consideration
involves harm to someone or their property, the contract is void. For instance, a contract to
commit assault is void.

5. Are immoral or opposed to public policy: If the object or consideration is considered

immoral or against public policy, the contract is void. For example, a contract for prostitution
is void.

Cases in Which the Object and Consideration are Unlawful

1. Forbidden by Law:

o Example: A agrees to sell B a piece of land for ₹50,000, but the sale is prohibited by a
government regulation. This contract is void because the object (sale of land) is
forbidden by law.

2. Defeats the Provisions of Law:

o Example: A agrees to pay B ₹10,000 if B helps A to evade income tax. This contract is
void because the object (tax evasion) defeats the provisions of the law.

3. Fraudulent:

o Example: A agrees to sell goods to B, but the goods are stolen. This contract is void
because the consideration (stolen goods) is fraudulent.

4. Injury to Person or Property:

o Example: A agrees to pay B ₹5,000 to injure C. This contract is void because the
object (injury to C) involves harm to a person.

5. Immoral or Opposed to Public Policy:

o Example: A agrees to pay B ₹20,000 for engaging in prostitution. This contract is void
because the object (prostitution) is immoral and against public policy.
These principles ensure that contracts are made for lawful purposes and with lawful considerations,
thereby maintaining the integrity and fairness of contractual agreements.

what is consent? distuinguish between fraud and misrepresentation. what is the effect of undue
influence in a contract?

What is Consent?

Under Section 13 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, consent is defined as when two or more persons
agree upon the same thing in the same sense (consensus ad idem). This means that both parties
must have a mutual understanding and agreement on the terms of the contract.

Distinguish Between Fraud and Misrepresentation

Fraud and misrepresentation are both forms of false statements that can affect the validity of a
contract, but they differ in intent and consequences:

1. Fraud:

o Definition: Fraud involves intentional deception by one party to induce another

party to enter into a contract. It is defined under Section 17 of the Indian Contract
Act, 1872.

o Intent: The party making the false statement knows it is untrue and intends to
deceive the other party.

o Consequences: The aggrieved party can void the contract and claim damages for any
loss suffered due to the fraud.

o Example: A sells a car to B, falsely claiming it has never been in an accident, knowing
this to be untrue.

2. Misrepresentation:

o Definition: Misrepresentation involves making a false statement without intent to

deceive, believing it to be true. It is defined under Section 18 of the Indian Contract
Act, 1872.

o Intent: The party making the false statement believes it to be true and has no
intention to deceive.

o Consequences: The aggrieved party can void the contract but cannot claim
damages.

o Example: A sells a car to B, stating it has a new engine, believing this to be true, but
it turns out the engine is old.

Effect of Undue Influence in a Contract

Undue influence is defined under Section 16 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. It occurs when one
party is in a position to dominate the will of another and uses that position to obtain an unfair
advantage.
 • Definition: A contract is said to be induced by undue influence where the relations between
the parties are such that one party is in a position to dominate the will of the other and uses
that position to obtain an unfair advantage.

• Examples: Relationships such as parent and child, guardian and ward, doctor and patient, or
spiritual advisor and follower.

• Effect: A contract induced by undue influence is voidable at the option of the influenced
party. The influenced party can choose to either affirm or rescind the contract.

distuinguish between the following : (a) contingent contract and wagering agreement (b) coercion
and duress

(a) Contingent Contract vs. Wagering Agreement

Contingent Contract:

• Definition: A contingent contract is a contract to do or not to do something if some event,

collateral to such contract, does or does not happen. It is defined under Section 31 of the
Indian Contract Act, 1872.

• Essentials:

o The performance of the contract depends on the happening or non-happening of a

future uncertain event.

o The event must be collateral to the contract.

o The event should not be the mere will of the promisor.

• Example: A agrees to pay B ₹10,000 if B's house is destroyed by fire. Here, the contract is
contingent on the event of the house being destroyed by fire.

Wagering Agreement:

• Definition: A wagering agreement is an agreement between two parties where one party
promises to pay money or money's worth on the happening or non-happening of an
uncertain event. It is defined under Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

• Essentials:

o There must be two parties with opposite views regarding the outcome of an
uncertain event.

o The event is uncertain and the outcome is based on chance.

o Neither party has control over the event.

• Example: A and B bet ₹1,000 on the outcome of a cricket match. If A wins, B will pay him
₹1,000, and if B wins, A will pay him ₹1,000.

Key Differences:

• Nature: Contingent contracts are valid and enforceable, while wagering agreements are void
and unenforceable.
 • Purpose: Contingent contracts are made for legitimate purposes, whereas wagering
agreements are essentially bets or gambles.

• Control over Event: In contingent contracts, the event is collateral and not controlled by the
parties, while in wagering agreements, the event is purely based on chance and not
influenced by the parties.

(b) Coercion vs. Duress

Coercion:

• Definition: Coercion is defined under Section 15 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, as
committing or threatening to commit any act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code, or the
unlawful detaining or threatening to detain any property, with the intention of causing any
person to enter into an agreement.

• Essentials:

o Involves committing or threatening to commit an illegal act.

o Can involve detaining or threatening to detain property.

o The act must be intended to force someone into a contract.

• Example: A threatens to harm B's family if B does not sign a contract. Here, A is using
coercion to force B into the contract.

Duress:

• Definition: Duress, under common law, involves actual violence or threats of violence to a
person to compel them to enter into a contract. It is not explicitly defined in the Indian
Contract Act but is similar to coercion.

• Essentials:

o Involves physical violence or threats of violence.

o The threat must be immediate and directed at the person or their close relatives.

o The act must be intended to force someone into a contract.

• Example: A threatens to physically harm B if B does not sign a contract. Here, A is using
duress to force B into the contract.

Key Differences:

• Scope: Coercion includes threats to property and illegal acts, while duress primarily involves
threats of physical harm.

• Legal Context: Coercion is specifically defined in the Indian Contract Act, whereas duress is a
broader common law concept.

• Source of Threat: Coercion can come from any person, even a third party, while duress
typically involves threats from a party to the contract.
what is meant by discharge of contract? what are different modes of discharge of contract?

Under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the discharge of a contract refers to the termination of the
contractual relationship between the parties involved. This means that the rights and obligations
under the contract come to an end, and the parties are no longer bound by the terms of the
contract.

There are several modes of discharge of a contract:

1. Discharge by Performance: When both parties fulfill their respective obligations under the
contract, it is discharged by performance. This can be:

o Actual Performance: Both parties have completed their contractual duties.

o Attempted Performance: One party offers to perform their duty, but the other party
refuses to accept it.

2. Discharge by Agreement or Consent: The parties may mutually agree to discharge the
contract through:

o Novation: Substituting a new contract for the old one.

o Alteration: Changing the terms of the contract.

o Rescission: Canceling the contract.

o Waiver: One party voluntarily relinquishes their rights.

o Merger: Combining an inferior contract into a superior one.

3. Discharge by Lapse of Time: If the contract specifies a time frame for performance and it
lapses without performance, the contract is discharged.

4. Discharge by Operation of Law: This includes situations such as insolvency or death of a

party, which legally terminates the contract.

5. Discharge by Supervening Impossibility: If an unforeseen event makes the performance of

the contract impossible, it is discharged. This is also known as frustration of contract.

6. Discharge by Breach: If one party fails to perform their obligations, the other party may
treat the contract as discharged and seek remedies for breach.

These modes ensure that contracts are concluded in a structured manner, providing clarity and legal
recourse for the parties involved.

what is quasi contract? elaborate quasi contract under indian contract act 1872

A quasi-contract is a legal concept under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, that allows courts to enforce
obligations on parties even in the absence of a formal contract. These obligations are imposed to
prevent one party from being unjustly enriched at the expense of another. Quasi-contracts are not
actual contracts but are treated "as if" they were contracts to ensure fairness and justice.

Key Features of Quasi-Contracts

 1. Absence of Formal Agreement: There is no formal contract or mutual consent between the
parties.

2. Imposed by Law: The obligations are imposed by law to prevent unjust enrichment.

3. Unjust Enrichment: The principle of unjust enrichment is central, where one party benefits
at the expense of another without legal justification.

4. Non-Gratuitous Act: The benefit conferred is not intended as a gift, and the party providing
the benefit expects compensation.

Types of Quasi-Contracts under the Indian Contract Act, 1872

Quasi-contracts are codified under Sections 68 to 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872:

1. Supply of Necessaries (Section 68): If a person incapable of contracting (e.g., a minor or a

person of unsound mind) is supplied with necessaries suited to their condition in life, the
supplier is entitled to reimbursement from the property of the incapable person.

2. Payment by Interested Person (Section 69): When a person pays money on behalf of
another who is legally bound to pay, the person making the payment is entitled to be
reimbursed by the person on whose behalf the payment was made.

3. Obligation to Pay for Non-Gratuitous Act (Section 70): If a person lawfully does something
for another or delivers something to another, and it is not intended to be done gratuitously,
the other person is bound to make compensation for the benefit received.

4. Finder of Goods (Section 71): A person who finds goods belonging to another and takes
them into their custody is subject to the same responsibility as a bailee. The finder must take
all necessary measures to preserve the goods and return them to the owner.

5. Things Delivered by Mistake or Under Coercion (Section 72): If money or goods are
delivered by mistake or under coercion, the person who received them is bound to repay or
return them.

Example Case

In the case of State of West Bengal v. M/S. B. K. Mondal (1961), the government benefited from
construction work done by a contractor without a formal contract. The Supreme Court held that the
government was liable to pay the contractor for the services rendered under Section 70 of the Act.

Quasi-contracts ensure that justice is served by preventing unjust enrichment and providing
remedies even in the absence of formal agreements. If you have any more questions or need further
clarification, feel free to ask!

define injunction. what are the different kinds of injunction? when is temporary injunction
granted? Explain

An injunction is a judicial order that restrains a person from beginning or continuing an action
threatening or invading the legal right of another, or that compels a person to carry out a certain act,
such as making restitution to an injured party. Injunctions are a form of equitable relief and are used
to prevent harm rather than to compensate for it.

Different Kinds of Injunctions

1. Temporary Injunction: Also known as an interim or preliminary injunction, this is granted for
a specific period or until further orders of the court. It aims to maintain the status quo until
the final decision is made in the case.

2. Perpetual (Permanent) Injunction: This is a final order given by the court after the merits of
the case have been heard. It permanently restrains a party from doing a particular act or
compels them to perform a specific act.

3. Mandatory Injunction: This type of injunction requires a party to perform a specific act,
often to correct a wrong or to restore the situation to its previous state.

When is a Temporary Injunction Granted?

A temporary injunction is granted under the following conditions:

1. Prima Facie Case: The applicant must show that there is a prima facie case in their favor,
meaning there is a reasonable likelihood that they will succeed in the final hearing.

2. Irreparable Injury: The applicant must demonstrate that they will suffer irreparable harm if
the injunction is not granted. This means the harm cannot be adequately compensated by
damages.

3. Balance of Convenience: The court must be satisfied that the balance of convenience favors
the applicant. This means that the harm to the applicant if the injunction is not granted
would be greater than the harm to the respondent if it is granted.

4. Maintaining Status Quo: The primary purpose of a temporary injunction is to maintain the
status quo until the final resolution of the case.

Example Case

In the case of Dalpat Kumar v. Prahlad Singh (1992), the Supreme Court of India laid down the
principles for granting a temporary injunction. The court emphasized the need for a prima facie case,
irreparable injury, and balance of convenience.

narrate the cases in which specific performance is enforceable as per provisions of specific relief
act 1963

Under the Specific Relief Act, 1963, specific performance is a remedy that compels a party to
perform their contractual obligations when monetary compensation is inadequate. This remedy is
enforceable in certain cases as outlined in the Act. Here are the key scenarios where specific
performance is enforceable:

Cases Where Specific Performance is Enforceable

1. When There is No Standard for Ascertaining Actual Damage (Section 10(a)):

 o If the subject matter of the contract is unique or rare, such as a piece of land, a rare
artifact, or a unique work of art, and there is no standard for ascertaining the actual
damage caused by non-performance, specific performance may be enforced.

2. When Monetary Compensation is Inadequate (Section 10(b)):

o If monetary compensation is not an adequate remedy for the non-performance of

the contract, specific performance can be enforced. This is often the case with
contracts involving immovable property, where the unique nature of the property
makes monetary compensation insufficient.

3. Contracts for Sale, Lease, or Mortgage of Immovable Property (Section 14):

o Specific performance is generally enforceable for contracts involving the sale, lease,
or mortgage of immovable property, as these are considered unique and monetary
compensation is often inadequate.

4. Contracts for Personal Property with Special Value (Section 14):

o If the personal property has special value or interest to the plaintiff, specific
performance may be enforced. This includes items that are rare or have sentimental
value.

5. Contracts Not Specifically Enforceable (Section 14):

o Certain contracts are not specifically enforceable, such as those involving personal
service, contracts that are determinable in nature, or contracts that require constant
supervision by the court.

Conditions for Granting Specific Performance

1. Mutuality of Obligation:

o Both parties must be capable of performing their obligations under the contract.

2. Readiness and Willingness:

o The party seeking specific performance must demonstrate that they have been
ready and willing to perform their part of the contract.

3. Fairness and Equity:

o The contract must be fair and equitable, and the terms must not be overly harsh or
one-sided.

Example Case

In the case of Laxman Tatyaba Kankate v. Taramati Harishchandra Dhatrak (2010), the Supreme
Court of India upheld the specific performance of a contract for the sale of immovable property,
emphasizing that monetary compensation would not be an adequate remedy given the unique
nature of the property.

Specific performance is a powerful remedy that ensures parties fulfill their contractual obligations,
particularly when the subject matter of the contract is unique or when monetary compensation is
insufficient.