Free Consent, Legality of Object & Quasi Contracts
1. Consent and Free Consent (Sections 13 & 14)
Under Section 13, two or more persons are said to consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense (Consensus ad idem). Without true consensus, there is no agreement at all.
Under Section 14, consent is said to be free when it is NOT caused by:
Committing or threatening to commit any act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code (IPC), or unlawfully detaining property to force agreement (Contract is Voidable).
Where one party is in a position to dominate the will of another and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage (Doctor-patient, spiritual guru-disciple). (Voidable).
Active concealment of a fact, false statement made knowingly or recklessly, or promise made without intention of performing it (Voidable + Damages).
Innocent, positive assertion of an untrue fact believed to be true by the person making it, without intent to deceive (Voidable, no damages).
2. Doctrine of Mistake (Sections 20 to 22)
- Bilateral Mistake of Fact (Section 20): Where both parties to an agreement are under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement, the agreement is VOID (e.g. subject matter already destroyed at time of deal).
- Unilateral Mistake of Fact (Section 22): A contract is not voidable merely because it was caused by one of the parties being under a mistake of fact.
- Mistake of Law (Section 21): Ignorance of domestic law is no excuse (Ignorantia juris non excusat); mistake of foreign law is treated as mistake of fact (void).
3. Legality of Object & Public Policy (Section 23)
An agreement whose consideration or object is unlawful is void. Under Section 23, an object is unlawful if it is:
- Forbidden by law or defeats the provisions of any statutory enactment.
- Fraudulent or involves injury to the person or property of another.
- Regarded by the court as immoral or opposed to public policy (trading with an enemy, stifling criminal prosecution, champerty, trafficking in public honours).
4. Quasi-Contracts: Constructive Obligations (Sections 68 to 72)
A Quasi-Contract is not an actual contract created by mutual agreement. It is an obligation created by law in the absence of an agreement, based on the equitable doctrine that no person should be allowed to enrich themselves unjustly at the expense of another:
6. Landmark Legal Precedent: Derry v. Peek (1889)
Facts: The directors of a tramway company issued a prospectus stating they had the statutory right to run trams by steam power instead of horses. In fact, board approval was subject to Board of Trade consent, which was subsequently refused, causing the company to wind up. Peek sued directors for damages for fraudulent deceit.
Held: Lord Herschell ruled that to establish Fraud, there must be proof that a false representation was made (1) knowingly, or (2) without belief in its truth, or (3) recklessly, careless whether it be true or false. Because the directors honestly believed they would receive consent, they were guilty of innocent misrepresentation, not fraud.
7. Solved AKTU Previous Years Questions (PYQs)
Q1: What is a Quasi-Contract? Name two types under the Indian Contract Act.
Answer: A Quasi-Contract is an equitable obligation imposed by law (not by agreement of parties) to prevent unjust enrichment. Two statutory types are: (1) Section 70: Obligation to pay for non-gratuitous acts; (2) Section 71: Responsibility of a finder of lost goods.
Q2: Distinguish between Coercion and Undue Influence. Also explain the nature of Quasi-Contracts with illustrations under Sections 68-72 of the Indian Contract Act.
Model Answer Structure for Full 10 Marks:
- Coercion vs. Undue Influence Comparison Table:
- Nature of Force: Coercion involves physical force or IPC crimes (Sec 15); Undue Influence involves moral/mental pressure (Sec 16).
- Relationship: No prior relationship required in coercion; fiduciary/authority relationship essential in undue influence (doctor/patient).
- Criminal Liability: Coercion attracts criminal proceedings under IPC; undue influence is a civil wrongdoing.
- Concept of Quasi-Contracts: The equitable doctrine Nemo debet locupletari ex aliena jactura.
- Five Statutory Classes under ICA 1872:
- Section 68: Necessaries to incompetent persons.
- Section 69: Reimbursement of money paid by interested party.
- Section 70: Compensation for non-gratuitous acts.
- Section 71: Finder of goods duties.
- Section 72: Money paid under mistake or coercion.
- Conclusion: These constructive remedies ensure fair mercantile transactions.
Discussion & Questions
0 CommentsAcademic insights, questions, and conceptual clarifications from students & faculty.
No questions or comments yet
Have a doubt about this topic, an exam tip, or a conceptual perspective? Start the discussion below!
Leave a Comment / Ask a Question
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *