CONSENT

I. DEFINE CONSENT (S-13)

II. DEFINE FREE CONSENT (S-14)
III. COERCION (S-15)
 Detention of property
 1. Astley v. Reynolds (pledge silver plate £20+£10)
 Acts forbidden by the IPC
 2. Renganayakamma v. Alwar Setti (forced
adoption-detaining husband’s body)
 3. Muthia v. Muthukaruppa (agent refused to
return acc. Books to new agent; release deed)
 Threatening to commit suicide
 4. Amiraju v. Seshamma (husband threatened wife)
 5. Purabi Banerjee v. Basudev Mukerjee
IV. UNDUE INFLUENCE (S-16)
 Ability to dominate the will of other
 1. Mannu Singh v. Umadat Pande (Moksham)
 2. Allcard v. Skinner (sisterhood; 1869,79,85)
 Fiduciary relations: Solicitor &client; Doctor & Patient…
 Relations which involve domination (Relationship of
blood, marriage or adoption not sine qua non)
 3. Subhas Chandra Das Mushib v. Ganga Prasad Das
Mushib (grandpa partial to one of his grandsons)
 4. Jean mackenziea v. Royal Bank of Canada (no
presumption b/w Hus & Wife)
 5. Palanivelu v. Neelavanthi (2 sis in c/o mama)
 6. Rajamani Ammal v. Boora Samy (Bro. obtained
release deed from illiterate sis; joint family prop.)
  Unconscionable gifts/bargains
 7. Lakshmi Amma v. Narayana Bhatta (entire prop.
to one of his grandsons; nursing home taken c/o by
grandson)
 Inequality of bargaining power
 8. Lloyds bank v. Bundy (throwing the family out of
its only residence)
 Economic duress of forcing renegotiation of terms
No person can insist on a settlement procured by
intimidation
 9. D & C. Builders v. Rees (increased charge for
carriers to meet customers)
Unfair or Unreasonable dealings
 10. Central Inland Water Transport Corpn v. Brojo
Nath Ganguly (exploiting needy employee;
removed just by 3 months notice)
 Contracts with Pardanashin woman
 11. Ismail Mussajee v. Hafiz Boo
V. MISREPRESENTATION (S-18)
i. Unwarranted statements
ii. Breach of duty
iii. Inducing mistake about subject matter
 Expression of opinion (is not misrepresentation)
 1. Bisset v. Wilkinson (sheep farming-2000 sheep)
 Representation of state of mind
 2. Bannerman v. White (No S2 -hops; beer
production)
 Change of circumstances
  3. Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd. v. Mardon (estimated
2,00,000 galloons on false assumption)
 4. With v. O’Flanagon (sale of Dr. practice-£2000)
 Inducement
 5. Ship v. Crosskill
 Means of discovering truth
 6. Redgrave v. Hurd (sale of house & solicitor
practice)
 7. Walters v. Morgan (digging expensive minerals)
VI. FRAUD (S-17)
 Assertion of facts without belief in truth
 1. Derry v. peek (trams by steam power-horse
power; Board of trade)
 Active concealment
 2. Peek v. Gurney (Comp. avoided documents
containing liabilities)
 3. Sanjay Richharia v. Director, Indian Corpn. Ltd.
(hided pending criminal cases)
 4. Mithoolal Naik v. Life Insurance Corpn of India
(Ins. Contract; Mahajan Deolal; Rs.25,000)
 Representation must induce the other party to act upon
it
 5. Smith v. Chadwick (annual output 1 million
sterling; potential & Actual output)
 Contracts uberrima fides (Contracts of utmost good
faith)
1. Insurance Contracts (Refer case no.4)
2. Family settlements
3. Contracts for allotment of shares in company
 4. Parent & Child
5. Guardian & Ward (loco parentis)
6. Statutory duty to disclose
VII. MISTAKE (S-20,21&22)
i. Agreement void where both parties are under
mistake as to matter of fact (S-20) (Bilateral
mistake)
ii. Effect of mistake as to law (S-21) (ignorantia juris
non excusat)
Mistake of law of our country
Mistake of law of a foreign country
iii. Contracts caused by mistake of one party as to
matter of fact (Unilateral mistake) (S-22)
iv. Types of Mistakes
Mistake as to SUBJECT MATTER
 Mistake as to existence of subject matter (res extincta)
 1. Gustaucus Couturier v. Robert hastie (del
eredere agent) (cargo damaged on voyage-sold)
 2. Griffith v. Brymer (coronation procession of King;
11Am of 24/6/1902; 26/6; 10Am)
 Mistake as to Identity
Mistake caused by take over of business
 3. Boulton v. Jones (Brocklehurst optical eg)
Mistake of Identity caused by fraud
 4. James Cundy v. Thomas Lindsay (Blenkern & Co.;
Blenkiron & Co; handkerchiefs)
Distinction b/w Identity & Attributes (operative mistake
as to identity)
  5. King’s Norton Metal Co. Ltd v. Edridge, Merrett &
Co. Ltd (UM) (Hallam & Co. fictious name)
 6. Phillips v. Brooks Ltd. (UM)(Sir George Bullough,
diamond ring-£3000)
 7. Ingram v. Little (3 ladies-car sale-Hutchinson;
preponderate)
Where Fraud does not lead to mistake of identity*
 Levis v. Averay
Where Identity specially important
 8. Said v. Butt (specifically not to allow a person
into theatre)
 Mistake as to the Quality of the subject matter
 9. Smith v. Hughes (old oats for horse)
 10. Bell v. Lever Bros Ltd. (similar to Chanda
Kochchar’s case; £8000; compensation £30000)
 Mistake as to the Quantity of the subject matter
 11. Raffles v. Wichelhaus (125 bales of Surat
cotton-ex peerless-oct & dec)
 12. Henkel v. Pape (50 rifles-3 rifles story-telegraph
office mistake)
 Mistake as to the Title/Private rights to the subject
matter
 13. Cooper v. Phibbs (entitled to fishery. Uncle;
nephew; daughter)
 Mistake as to price of subject matter
 14. Sole v. Butcher (A&B house lease rent control-
£140-£250)
 Mistake as to nature of promise
Documents mistakenly signed or non est factum
 15. Foster v. Mackinnon (old man not able to read
signed the doc. of bill of exchange for £3,000)