Question 1 (d)
Undue influence and how it differs from coercion
9 marks
- Time to write
- About 18 minutes
- Topic
- Free consent
- Notes
- Crux notes
Question
Question 1 (d) · 9 marksWhat is undue influence? In what way does it differ from coercion as understood in the Indian Contract Act, 1872? Discuss.
Reworded from the university paper; the task is the same. The original paper belongs to the University of Delhi. See DU's question bank.
Before you write
Read off the question and its marks
Read from the question
- What…?Two asks in one question: answer both.
- DiscussA statement to explain: say what it means first, then build the answer around it.
- differ fromSet the differences out in a table, basis by basis, not as two separate essays.
Write it in this order
- Read; underline the asks; jot your points 1 min
- 1 Undue influence defined; position to dominate the will; relationship 3 marks 5 min
- 2 Coercion defined 2 marks 4 min
- 3 Differences 4 marks 7 min
- Check: every ask answered, key terms underlined 1 min
Short on time? Trim steps 1–3 evenly rather than skip one: each is capped at its own marks.
Try it first. About 18 minutes for 9 marks. Write it out, then open the solution.
Solution
Hover or tap a marked figure, like 72,000, to see how it is made and where else it appears.
Coercion (section 15). Coercion means committing, or threatening to commit, an act that the Indian Penal Code forbids, or unlawfully detaining property or threatening to do so, to anyone's prejudice, with the intention of making any person enter into an agreement. A contract obtained in this way is voidable at the option of the aggrieved party. It makes no difference whether the Indian Penal Code is in force where the coercion takes place (Explanation to s. 15).
1A raised lathi over the counter: the signature it forces is coercion.
CoercionCommitting, or threatening to commit, an act that the Indian Penal Code forbids
2At the sickbed, the nephew guides the trembling pen—position used, will dominated.
Undue influenceTo dominate the will of the other and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage over
3Either way, the paper is the victim's to tear—voidable at his choice, not void on its own.
VoidableSuch a contract is voidable, not void.
Undue influence (section 16). A contract is induced by undue influence when one party is able “to dominate the will of the other and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage over” him. Such a contract is voidable, not void. The Act presumes such a position where one party has real or apparent authority over the other or stands in a fiduciary relation to him (s. 16(2)(a)), or contracts with a person whose mental capacity is affected, temporarily or permanently, by age, illness, or mental or bodily distress (s. 16(2)(b)): a lawyer buying property from his own client is a typical case. Where such a person contracts with the other and the transaction appears unconscionable, on its face or on the evidence, the burden of proving that the contract was not induced by undue influence lies on the party in a position to dominate the other's will; the sub-section leaves section 111 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 unaffected (s. 16(3)). Some relationship between the parties is essential, and the influence is always exercised between the parties to the contract.
Differences. Take two cases: a buyer who signs because the seller's men threaten to burn his shop, and a devoted follower whose spiritual adviser uses her trust in him to get her to gift her house to his ashram for nothing. The first is coercion, the second undue influence, and they differ in three ways.
- Who must be involved. Undue influence needs a relationship in which one party can dominate the other's will, and the pressure comes from that party to the contract. Coercion needs no relationship at all; the threat may even come from a stranger to the contract.
- What the pressure consists of. Coercion is a crime or a wrong in itself: an act forbidden by the Penal Code, or the unlawful detention of property, or a threat of either. Undue influence involves no crime; it is the misuse of mental or moral ascendancy.
- What the court does afterwards. Both make the contract voidable. A coerced party who rescinds must give back any benefit he received (s. 64). Where undue influence is shown, the court has a wider discretion: it may set the contract aside absolutely, or on terms, and may order the benefit returned in whole, in part, or not at all.
Where the 9 marks sit
| # | Component | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Undue influence defined; position to dominate the will; relationship | 3 |
| 2 | Coercion defined | 2 |
| 3 | Differences | 4 |
| Total | 9 |
Report a problemopens an email to admin@getkunji.com with the question ID7358-Q1dalready filled in.