DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE
COERCION AND UNDUE INFLUENCE

SUBJECT
LAW OF CONTRACTS

NAME OF THE FACULTY

B.V.S. SUNITA

NAME OF THE CANDIDATE & ROLL. NO.

PEDAVEGULA S R S PAVAN KIRAN
19LLB029
SEMESTER: II

1|Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to show my gratitude towards our respected professor Ms.

B.V.S.Sunita who has allotted me this project and allowed me and given me a chance to prove
myself at the initial stage of my work I have a zero knowledge about the allotted topic. Mam
has guided me during the consultations and increased my knowledge about the topic and
increased my self-confidence and I shall say that this a golden opportunity to prove myself and
this project that I was going to do is based on the topic of coercion and undue influence.
Through this particular topic I came across different kinds of topics like the coercion, undue
influence, Duress and many other things.

Secondly, I would like to thank my friends who have always been with
me and saw my day by day progress and helped me to complete the complete project on time
without any delay.

2|Page
ABSTRACT

Contracts are one of the important topics in the field of law. Most of the topics
in the daily cases deal with the contracts which are made under the Indian Contracts Act which
was amended in the year 1872. It was for sure one of the most strict and tough laws established
in the history of the Indian Judiciary. In the present topic of project given by our respected
Contracts Mam Ms. Sunita I was going to deal with the topics of ‘Coercion’ and ‘Undue
Influence’ in detailed.

Basically, there is a general principle in the contract law that the parties shall
enter into the contract ‘Knowingly’ and ‘Willingly’. It means that there should be his mental
intention or his own intention of the party to be a part of that contract. If anyone of the party
enters into the party under the threats of harm and of any kind of harm it was considered as the
Contract Coercion

The term Coercion is better defined in the Section 15 of the Indian Contracts
Act. Section 15 of the Indian Contracts Act states that a coercion is an act of threatening or
committing to threaten the party to detain the property to the prejudice of the person whatever
the intension of causing any person to enter into the agreement.

But when it comes to that of the undue influence, it is the term that is most commonly
used in the topic of the contracts. The particular topic of the contract which is the Undue
Influence is defined in the article 16 of the Indian Contracts Act 1872 as if when a contract in
which the relations that are subsidising or any one of the reason that subsidises between the
parties are in a relation such that they are in a position to obtain an unfair advantage over the
other. In this particular tpic we shall discuss about the topics that touches the border of the
Undue Influence and we shall make our statements stronger with some of the case laws that
are similar to the topics that I would like to discuss in the present topic.

3|Page
For this present project work I would like to chapterise the entire project into the following sub
topics

1. Coercion
• Introduction
• History
• Amendments added to the topic of coercion
• Advantages and disadvantages of the topic of coercion in contracts
• Case laws regarding the topic of coercion
2. Undue Influence
• Introduction
• History
• Amendments added to the topic of the Undue Influence
• Advantages and disadvantages of the Undue Influence
• Case laws regarding the topic of the Undue Influence
3. Relation between both the topics of Undue Influence and Coercion and Undue
Influence (which includes the similarities and differences that lie in both the topics and
covers the case laws in which judgement is given keeping in mind of both the topics)

4|Page
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………….7

2. COERCION……………………………………………………………………..8

2.1 ESSENTIALS OF A CONTRACT TO BE A COERCION……………..9

2.2 PERIOD OF DETENTION……………………………………………....10

2.3 EFFECTS OF THE COERCION………………………………………...11

2.4 BURDEN OF PROOF…………………………………………………...11

2.5 DURESS………………………………………………………………....12

2.6 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COERCION AND DURESS………………13

2.7 POWER OF COERCION AS STATED IN THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

……………………………………………………………………………....13

2.8 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………14

3. UNDUE INFLUENCE……………………………………………………..…15

3.1 EFFECT OF UNDUE INFLUENCE OVER THE CONTRACTS……....16

5|Page
 3.2 BURDEN OF PROOF………………………………………………….…….16

3.3TYPES OF UNDUE INFLUENCE…………………………………………….17

3.4DIFFERENCES BETWEEN COERCION AND UNDUE INFLUENCE…….20

4. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………..…..22

5. BIBILIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………..………23

6|Page
INTRODUCTION:
It is very important or we can say that a contract to be a valid contract it should
have the free consent of both the parties is a very essential thing or a mandatory thing. Let us
assume a factual situation that there are two parties named X and Y where X makes Y to sign
the contract by pointing the gun on the gun point and in another factual situation where a retailer
makes an claims that the product what the consumer manufactures was made in France whereas
it was actually manufactured in Taiwan. In all the above factual situations the offer has been
accepted by the offeree which lead to the formation of the agreement because there was a
meeting of minds.

However, the consent of the person has been manipulated there was a meeting
of the minds. If it is any kind of coercion, Undue Influence, Fraud and misrepresentation they
may not have consented the agreement but here it was not, it would be an unjust if the party
was not allowed into the contract. Now, let us try to take the reverse case of it that the party
who was innocent wants the contract to be performed and while the other party wants to make
it aside. In this case, the contract doesn’t attain nullity but the other party should bound to the
contract and there was a way to set the contract aside that is through the option of the innocent
party. For such reasons these kinds of contracts are called as the voidable contracts. This kind
of contract is different from that of the void contract which is never formed. It is a bit different
that the contract can be turned into nullity whenever the party wants. In such cases the Indian
Contracts Act has provided the key feature to get the contract accepted which is the free
consent. A contract without any free consent it will be considered as voidable.

Here, free consent means that the parties who are involving in the contract must
mean the same thing with the same sense without any confusion. If their minds don’t meet
then the contract will not be free. The consent is said to be free if there are no traces of the
fraud, Undue Influence, Coercion, misrepresentation and mistake in the contract that has been
made. Now, in the present project let our limit the scope only to the issues of coercion and
undue influence.

7|Page
 According to Sir John Salmond, the flaws in consent of the contract is
considered as the ‘Error in Causa’. It is because he states that an error has been made by the
parties in giving the consent to the agreement which has all become the main responsible for
vitiating the valuable contracts.

The Indian Contracts Act itself definers the consent in the section 13 by stating
“when two or more persons are said to consent when they agree upon same thing in the same
sense.”

It was described in the Indian Contracts Act from the section 13 to the section
19A about the agreements that have been made without the consent including the voidability
of agreements without free consent which is in section 19 of the Indian Contracts Act and the
power to set aside a contract has been added to the ICA in the section 19A.

Being filled with all these things and having developed all the overall
framework of the Indian Contracts Act let us strictly restrict the scope of our present project to
the topics of Coercion and that of Undue Influence

COERCION:

The Indian Contracts Act is a very well bounded act composed with all the possible
ways of bringing justice against the wrongs that were committed around the day to day life.
One such way is that threatening the parties or any one of the parties to commit the act. Leaving
this alike may lead to increase the threatening calls of the parties and lead to the increase in the
rowdyism in the society. So, in order to keep them aside and to establish a better justice the
Indian Law Makers made some provision in the act they have made which is called as the
coercion and was described in the section 15 of the provided Indian Contracts Act. In the act it
was described as Coercion is committing, or threatening to commit, any act forbidden by the
Indian Penal Code (Section 45 of 1860), or the unlawful detaining, or threatening to detain,
any property, to the prejudice of any person whatever, with the intention of causing any person
to enter into an agreement. The words in this segment are significantly more extensive which

8|Page
existed amid the English authorities. This definition expresses that the coercion which refutes
a contract ought to not really go from a gathering to an agreement or ought to be quick against
a man whom it was proposed to cause to go into a contract or anything which influences his
property

The meaning in section 15 is required to consider solely whether consent in a

particular case is a free consent falling within area and it does not prescribe the significance of
the word coercion as used as part of segment of the Act.

To give a better introduction about the topic of the coercion let us discuss a
factual situation let us take example of a man named who is some X who threatens to murder
Y another person who was travelling in the same boat if he did not write a pronote on the favour
of X which amounts to coercion even though Indian Penal Code doesn’t apply to the high seas.

ESSENTIALS OF A CONTRACT TO BE A COERCION

A contract is said to be coming under the coercion when the person

committing the act or threatening to commit the act which was forbidden by the Indian Penal
Code mainly with the intention of causing a person to enter a person into an agreement make
one of the most important essential in the case of the coercion.

If there is any scent of unlawful detention of a person or threatening a person

to detain any kind of property to the or any person with an intention of making the party enter
into the agreement then it will also be considered as the coercion of the contract.This can be
better explained with a case law.

CASE LAW

MASJIDI VS. AYISHA, 18801

This is one of the most important case in the topic of coercion and in this
particular case the court stated that the forbearance to sue is a valid consideration to enter into

1 MASJIDI VS. AYISHA, SA No. 528 of 1990(D)

9|Page
a contract. The facts of the case are as such. There are two people involved in this case named
Masjidi and Ayesha. Ayesha committed a crime against the petitioner Masjidi and the
petitioner masjidi made a proposal that if she makes a proposal with Ayisha that if she enters
into a contract with her then she will not file any criminal proceedings against her but if she
fails to do so she will file those against her. Later Ayisha made a breach of contract and as
stated earlier in the proposal Masjidi filed criminal proceedings against her and Ayisha took a
defence against Masjidi that the consent she obtained when at the initial stage of the contract
is through the coercion. Then the court after hearing all the voices that are raise in this case it
declared that the section 15 which describes about the false charges is not applicable under this
case as threat to sue comes under the ambit of the coercion and stated that forbearance to sue
is a valid consideration

The topic of coercion has a special power it is that this kind of contracts are
immaterial whether the Indian Penal Code is in force or not where the coercion is employed

PERIOD OF DETENTION

At first during the introduction of this particular topic of the coercion in the
Indian Contracts Act there was no mention about the particular detention period of the goods
which were taken down in the particular coercion cases. This particular thing made many things
confused and the court gave the required clarity over this particular issue in the case of Astley
Vs. Reylands.

CASE LAW

ASTLEY VS. REYLANDS, 17312

This is a very important landmark case which gave the judgement over the issue of
limitation of the time period of the goods. The facts of the case are such Astley and Reylands
were the two parties involved in the case. Astley pledged a valuable article with reylands for a
cost of 20 pound and she has promised to pay both the principal and the interest. Later, due to
an urgent necessary with the particular object Astley approached Reylands and he used this as

2
Astley v. Reynolds (1731) 2 (3tr. 916; but 8eE.

10 | P a g e
a chance for collecting some extra money asked an extra of 10 pounds extra money other than
the principal and interest. There is nothing that Astley can do so she paid the extra amount that
Reylands has asked for and took that valuable article. Later Astley filed a suit of coercion on
Reylands stating that he has unlawfully detained the good seeing the emergency situation of
Astley. The court after listening the arguments from both petitioner and respondent it had
pronounced its judgement that Reylands is liable to pay back Astley the extra 10 pounds which
he had taken in excess.

EFFECTS OF THE COERCION

It was particularly sub divided in the Indian Contracts Act in a separate

section of section 19 under the sub heading of ‘voidability of the agreements without the free
consent’. A coercion normally vitiates the free consent of the party and in the section 19 it was
stated that a contract induces by the coercion and is voidable at the option of the party whose
consent was caused through coercion.

BURDEN OF PROOF

In every case t

he role of burden of proof is very necessary and in contracts too it is very necessary and here
in the contracts as we are discussing about the topic of coercion the complete burden of proof
lies on the party who wants to avoid the contract on the grounds of coercion. The burden of
proof lies on the party that takes the intimidation argument. The burden of proof is greater on
him. It is so that pure possibility or assumption is not coercion. To order to establish compulsion
a defendant must show that there was a danger that was prohibited by law, and that compelled
him to enter into a contract that he would not otherwise have.

There is a quite unique and well doubted question that whether the threat
to commit a suicide or not. This question is mostly a normal doubt to most of the questions, the
answer to the question is specially discussed in the Indian Penal Code and it stated that the
committing a suicide is a coercion and a kind of act and it is forbidden by the I.P.C.

11 | P a g e
This was well explained in many cases by the honourable courts in the Indian judiciary in all
those cases let us examine one of the most famous and most important case which gave a clear
clarity about the topic of suicide.

CASE LAW

CHIKKAM AMMIRAJU VS. CHIKKAM SESHAMMA, 19183

The name of the case is Chikkam Ammiraju Vs. Chikkam Seshamma and this case
deals about the section 309 of the Indian Penal Code. It gives the clear definition of the suicide
and the attempt to suicide whether it is punishable or not.

The facts of the case are as follows the plaintiff and the defendant are wife and
husband. Mr. Ammi Raju gave a threat to his wife saying that he will commit suicide if she
doesn’t give or transfer the whole property to his brother. In that fear that she might loss her
husband she has accepted to transfer the property on the name of his husband’s brother. Later
she got out of that fear and rejected to perform the contract. So, the husband, filed a suit in the
court claiming the property of his wife. The court after hearing the arguments from both the
sides declared that the act of threatening a person to commit a suicide is prohibited under the
eyes of law which implies that the acts done by the petitioner are punishable under the eye of
law and the contract that has been made between the petitioner and the respondent is a voidable
contract and so the respondent Mrs. Ammi Raju is not liable to transfer the property on the nae
of his husband’s brother.

DURESS:

Normally, duress is the term usually applicable under the English law of
contract and it actually involves or includes in the actual act of violence over a person and not
of the property. The main thing in the topic of the duress that it must be committed by a party
to contact upon the other party or else to the wife or children or any blood relation to the party.

3
Chikkam Ammiraju v. Chikkam Seshamma , (1917) 32 Mad. LJ. 494-

12 | P a g e
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COERCION AND DURESS

The main difference between these two terms is that the term coercion
is used in the Indian Contract Act whereas the term Duress is used in the English Contract Law
which is followed in England. Coercion has more scope than the duress and it covers a wide
area than that if the duress, other than the actual act of violence over the person it also acts in
the threats to the property in its ambit but whereas when it comes to that of the duress it has a
shorter scope and it is usually includes the actual act of violence over the property and it doesn’t
deal with that of the property. The other difference between these two terms is that the coercion
has no restrictions that this particular case should be filed on a person of particular
characteristics

People normally get doubted in the way whether the compulsion of the law is
an act of coercion or not. This doubts were clarified in the section 15 of the Indian Contracts
Act by stating that the compulsion of the law doesn’t come under the eyes of coercion and in
the eye of law such kind of consent will be consent will be considered as a free consent.

POWER OF COERCION AS STATED IN THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT

The topic of coercion of contract is also explained in the specific relief act
which has given a clear-cut information on the power of coercion. It was stated in the act clearly
that court can deny specific performance to the claimant whenever there is an unfair advantage
to the plaintiff over the defendants when forming a contract. On the opposite, if the defendant
has entered into a contract which makes it unethical in that case to enforce specific
performance, he may also be rejected for specific performance

This particular point of the power of the coercion was better explained in the case of Essar
Steel Ltd Vs. UOI, 2006

13 | P a g e
 ESSAR STEEL LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA, 20064

This is a case where the court has looked down over all the issues that are
covered with that and gave the judgement with a complete analysis over the particular aspect.
This is one of the most important judgements that the court has pronounced till now over the
aspect. The facts of the case are such a way that Essar and Co made a deal with GAIL for the
supply of the gas. There is a proposal between both of them about building a pipeline by the
Essar and Co. they started to move on the way they stated and started to perform the contract
with their money. GAIL sent some gas to Essar and Co. and sent a pricelist to it. In that pricelist
they have sent they have included the transportation charges which Essar and Co had they
themselves had their own transport as they build their own pipeline for the transportation of
the gas and in such case no transportation charges should be charged. So, they have not paid
GAIL the transportation charges so they have detained the pipeline. Essar and Co filed a case
against the GAiL stating they have used coercion to sign in the contract and the court finalised
the case by stating that GAIL has an obligation to supply the gas.

CONCLUSION

It can be said that coercion is one of the major factors affecting an individual's
judgment, forcing him to enter into a contract that he would not otherwise have. The section
also details how a person can, or may not, differentiate an act from coercion. The burden of
proof in case of coercion rests on the person defending coercion. The explanation behind it is
that if it weren't that way anyone could have told saying he's been threatened. There is a fine
line between the narrower definition of duress under English law and the broader dimension of
coercion under Indian Contract law. To conclude, any contract under pressure is voidable at
the aggrieved party's choice.

4
2004 (176) ELT 64 Guj, (2006) 1 GLR 436

14 | P a g e
UNDUE INFLUENCE

In the law of contracts the topic of coercion is a very important and most confusing
topic and the act itself gives a brief clarification about the Undue Influence in the best way. It
is defined in the contract law that the contract is said to be induced by the undue influence
when it clearly gives a chance to the person where relations subsisting between the parties and
due to such thing one such party gets dominated by the or which gives the other person a
position to dominate the will of the other person and uses the position to obtain an unfair
advantage over the other.

In this particular topic of undue Influence, without any kind of prejudice to the
generality of the particular topic principle is said to be applied when the person is in a particular
position to the dominate the will of the another party when

• Where he holds a real or apparent authority over the other or he stands in a fiduciary
relationship towards each other then he is said to be in a dominated state or we can
also say that
• Where he makes a contract with a person whose mental capacity is temporarily or
permanently effected by the reason of age or mental illness or any kind of bodily stress.

If there is a person who is in such a position to dominate the will of another enters into a
contract with him and the transaction appears in the face of the contract that was made or in
the evidence that has been provided in the case makes the contract to be unconscionable.

The definition of undue influence in American law is famously

complicated, and any effort to describe undue influence frequently degenerates into little more
than platitudes about "substituting one's volition for another" and generalities about whether a
testator is "susceptible" to any kind of power deemed by statute to be "undue." For better grasp
the importance of excessive power, the historical context needs to be investigated. Late Roman
law does not recommend will obstacles dependent on unfair interference from others.

15 | P a g e
 When we move to the aspect of what actually does the undue influence
means and what does it mentions about we can clearly say that undue influence is clearly
dominating the will of the other person or the party with an intention to obtain the unfair
advantages over the other. If the conditions such as the relation tha was subsisting between the
parties is in such a way that any one of the party is in that position to dominate the will of the
another with the use of his position and with any of the cruel intention to obtain an unfair
advantage over the other then we can be able to say that the party have done the act of undue
influence and in such way it is defined.

EFFECT OF UNDUE INFLUENCE OVER THE CONTRACTS

The other most popular question that comes into the minds of everyone when they look into
any thing is that mainly does it has any affect with the subject that they are dealing with. This
is a normal human psychology which makes man to think in such a manner. So, let us go on
the same psychology and look into the thing whether this particular undue influence effects the
topic of contracts or not.

As we all know the point that the person who is unduly influenced can have the
power to set the agreements aside if he acts in a good time and does nothing in order to show
that he has subsequently affirmed the agreement which makes the agreement go voidable. The
major worrying part in the topic of the undue influence is that it must be avoided before the
third party gets involved into the contract or else the innocent third party will be effected
through this contract as the agreement that was caused by the undue influence is voidable at
any instance when the party against whom the undue influence has been done.

BURDEN OF PROOF

In such kind of contracts where undue influence takes place then the complete
burden of proof lies upon the person who is in such a position to dominate the will of the other
. there was nothing given in the act shall effect the provisions laid down under the section 111
of the Indian Contracts Act, 1872

16 | P a g e
 According to the Indian Contracts Act any act can be presumed to be influenced
by the undue influence if they come through the following conditions that

• A party shall be in a position to dominate the free will of the other party.
• The contract that has been made is unconscionable to be particular the contract is
unreasonable.

In such case that the dominant party is under the burden to prove that the undue
influence was not employed on that particular person then he have to prove that the person is
not in the state of the undue influence then there was a chance to attain success in the case.

Here, let us discuss about the unconscionable transactions, generally the

transactions that appears to be unreasonable the dominant party to prove that there is no undue
influence makes the party to prove that there is no traces of the undue influence which
particularly mentioned here as the Unconscionable transactions.

Let us check whether there is any other way to get rid of the case for any kind
of weaker party. The only way for the party to get rid of this is nothing but to prove that the
influence was employed on them as and undue influence defines clearly that if any transaction
enters into the ordinary course of business due to certain contingencies then it is not considered
as the undue influence.

TYPES OF UNDUE INFLUENCE

In this particular kind of undue influence the claimant who claims for the
sum relief he must establish the particular relation to the transaction which lead the other party
to use the undue influence. Although there shall be no traces of this particular sense of undue
influence in the previous history of the party that who involves in the act of undue influence

17 | P a g e
but he shall prove that there is a strong reason behind his acts and there is a quite big reason
for him to commit such act. There is normally such kind of relationship that exists between the
wife and husband.

The topic of the undue influence can be sub divided into the two different
categories in which one was the actual undue influence that we has discussed in the above said
paragraph and the other one gets again divided into two other things or can be said as two other
sub divisions like taking some special cases where some kind of special relationship occurs
and sometimes it doesn’t. Now, let us examine about the different types of the undue influences
or the divisions of the undue influence.

One of the above said influence that was a reason for the establishment of the
undue influence is that an influence which is made upon the people unduly and which involves
in a special relationship. This category applies to certain established special “fiduciary” kind
of relationships in which parent and child; guardian and ward; religious advisor and disciple;
solicitor and client; and trustee and beneficiary other than husband and wife. Such a special
relationship gives rise to a presumption of influence only, but not undue influence. If the
transaction in question is suspicious then it is called for explanation before the court.

Then there will be an existence of an a second evidential presumption, of undue influence, will
arise. This second presumption, unlike the first, is rebuttable

To get more through the topic of the fiduciary relationship and all that can
be better understood by reading the case of Moody Vs. Cox

MOODY VS. COX, 19175

This is one of the most important case in the topic of the undue influence
and in this case the facts are in such a way that there will be a lawyer and he sells his property
to a client of him for more than the market price using some undue influence for the sale deed.
Later after few moments he comes to know about the particular thing and refuses to enter into
the contract. The lawyer filed a case against the client stating that he has breached the contract

5
Moody Vs. Cox ( 1917) Ch. 71

18 | P a g e
but the client took the defence that he has used the undue influence in order to make him enter
into the contract. Finally the court found that there were some traces of the undue influence
and stated that the party has no reason for paying more than the sale price and stated that the
client need not to buy the property more than the market price.

In the next case there will be no existence of any kind of special

relationship and it covers all the cases in which any kind of special relationship that we have
mentioned in the earlier was not mentioned and the way the relationship is nevertheless one of
the truth and confidence that has been made and in which one of the party is in a position to
dominate the person and to take part in the undue influence that was made by the party over
the other one. Taking the case of Ethridge into consideration we can easily say that there is no
longer any kind of presumptions that occur can be taken into the consideration that of undue
influence in such cases. The total burden of proof lies on the claimant that he has to show that
he has placed some trust over the other party but he has never been up to the mark after its
establishment. Then when there is any call for the explanation which is one of the evidential
presumptions that were made that there has been some undue influence that has been arisen
and the total burden of proof lies on the defendant to prove that no such kind of undue
influences have taken place in the case.

Thus, if there is any kind of interference of the undue influence then it may
also apply even if the relationship is not within one of the above said special relationships but
one party, by any reason of the confidence reposed in him or her by the other weaker party, is
able to take unfair advantage of the act caused by the party.

The topic of the undue influence can be better understood by reading the case
of Manu Singh Vs. Umadat Pande

MANU SINGH VS. UMADAT PANDE, 18906

This is a case between a spiritual guruji and his beloved devotee the facts
of the case are such that there was a spiritual guru who was very much famous in the region

6
Mannu Singh v. Umadat Pande, 12 All 523 (1890) 14

19 | P a g e
his ashram was situated and people used to think that he was a little powerful and he has some
magical powers and there was a disciple for that guru and he asked her to transfer all her
property on the name of him. If she does so he shall show that how her life will be in her next
world. The woman believed in the guru and transferred all her property on the name of the
spiritual guru. But, later she came to know it was all fake and asked the guru to return the
property but he doesn’t. so she has filed a case against the guruji and his disciples stating that
they have used the undue influence in order to obtain her property. When it came to the end
the court has stated that after hearing the arguments from both the sides and the honourable
court has made its decision stating that they have traced a bit of undue influence in the acts of
the defendant and ordered them to return the property to the plaintiff

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN COERCION AND UNDUE INFLUENCE

Coercion and the undue influence are some of the most important topics in the subject
of contracts most of the people think that they are the same. It is true that both are having a
similar kind of things but they are quiet different in nature and some other aspects. Now let us
try to deal with the differences that which both these topics of coercion and undue influence
possess. The major differences between coercion and undue influence are as under:

1. The act of threatening a person in order to induce him to enter into an agreement is
known as coercion whereas The act of persuading the free will of the other party, by
taking advantage of position over the other weaker party, is known as undue influence.

2. The topic of coercion is defined in the Indian Contracts Act in the section 15 whereas
Undue Influence is defined in section 16 of the Indian contract Act, 1872.

3. Any benefit that was received under coercion should be restored back to the other party.
Whereas when it comes to the undue influence, any benefit received under undue
influence, is to be returned back to the party as per the directions given by the
honourable court.

4. The party who employs coercion on the opposite party, is criminally liable under the
Indian Penal Code. On the other hand, the party who exercises undue influence over
the other party, is not criminally liable under the same Indian Penal Code.

20 | P a g e
5. The major difference between the topics of the coercion and the undue influence is that
they differ in the way they make effect on the person or the party. Where Coercion
involves a physical force over the other party, whereas Undue Influence involves the
mental pressure over the opposite weak party.

6. The parties who are facing a complaint under coercion need not to be in any relationship
with each other they shall be two unknown persons or shall be between any two new
faces. When the same things comes to undue influence, the parties who are involved in
the undue influence must be in a fiduciary relationship with each other.

21 | P a g e
CONCLUSION

Contracts are one of the important topics in the field of law. Most
of the topics in the daily cases deal with the contracts which are made under the Indian
Contracts Act which was amended in the year 1872. It was for sure one of the most strict and
tough laws established in the history of the Indian Judiciary. In the present topic of project
given by our respected Contracts Mam Ms. Sunita I was going to deal with the topics of
‘Coercion’ and ‘Undue Influence’ in detailed.

Basically, there is a general principle in the contract law that the parties shall
enter into the contract ‘Knowingly’ and ‘Willingly’. It means that there should be his mental
intention or his own intention of the party to be a part of that contract. If anyone of the party
enters into the party under the threats of harm and of any kind of harm it was considered as the
Contract Coercion

The term Coercion is better defined in the Section 15 of the Indian Contracts
Act. Section 15 of the Indian Contracts Act states that a coercion is an act of threatening or
committing to threaten the party to detain the property to the prejudice of the person whatever
the intension of causing any person to enter into the agreement.

But when it comes to that of the undue influence, it is the term that is most commonly
used in the topic of the contracts. The particular topic of the contract which is the Undue
Influence is defined in the article 16 of the Indian Contracts Act 1872 as if when a contract in
which the relations that are subsidising or any one of the reason that subsidises between the
parties are in a relation such that they are in a position to obtain an unfair advantage over the
other. In this particular tpic we shall discuss about the topics that touches the border of the
Undue Influence and we shall make our statements stronger with some of the case laws that
are similar to the topics that I would like to discuss in the present topic.

22 | P a g e
BIBILIOGRAPHY

Taxmann’s Law of Contracts by Dr. Rajni Malhotra Dhingara

Law of Contracts by Dr. Avtar Singh, Twelfth Edition

ONLINE RESOURCES

http:// www.manupatra.com...........................................................Manupatra

www.westlawindia.com ………………………………………….Westlaw India

www.scconline.com/ ………………………………………………SCC Online

www.jstor.org ……………………………………………………….JSTOR

23 | P a g e