Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

10. I have considered the rival submissions. It is evident that this additional issue was recorded in the order-sheet dated 5-4-1991. A perusal of the entirejudgment goes to show that this additional issue escaped the notice of the Court and counsel appearing for the parties. A careful reading of issue Nos. 1, 2 and this additional issue makes it clear that this additional issue practically stands covered by both the issue Nos. 1 and 2. The term 'undue influence' is defined under Section 16 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (in short the Act) while the term 'fraud' is defined under Section 17 of the Act. The provisions of both the sections are as under:--

Nothing in this sub-section shall affect the provisions of Section 111 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872),

17. "Fraud" defined.-- "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:

(1) the suggestion, as a fact, of that which is not true, by one who does not believe it to be true; (2) the active concealment of a fact by one having knowledge or belief of the fact;

12. Second Point:-- According to the provisions of Section 10 of the Act, all the 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. The term 'free consent' has been defined by Section 14 of the Act. 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.