All the following questions are answered as the same is of 10 marks.

Take notice of the important things: length of the question, inclusion of illustration, mention of case-laws, and the concluding lines 1. What do you mean by void agreement? A contract entered into due to undue-influence and without consideration is void agreement or voidable agreement? The term void agreement includes two words, void and agreement. The meaning of void is having no legal force, and meaning of agreement is two or more persons agreeing upon a thing in same manner, and with same meaning. Void agreement is a kind of agreement which has no legal backing. Or, in other words, an agreement which cant be enforced under any provision of law is void agreement. It is defined u/s 2(g) of Indian Contract Act, 1872. It simply says that an agreement not enforceable by Law is void agreement. Sec. 24 to Sec. 30 of Indian Contract Act declare specific circumstances which make an agreement void. When two or more persons enter into an agreement, the agreement may be enforceable, may not be enforceable, or cant be enforced. While the first kind of agreement is a valid agreement, second kind of agreement is voidable agreement, and the third kind of agreement is void agreement. An agreement may be a valid agreement at the time of its inception, but, it may become void agreement at later stage. If an agreement is void agreement at the time of its inception, its called void ab-initio. Circumstances which make an agreement to be void The following provisions of Indian Contract Act declare an agreement to be void: Considerations are objects unlawful in part [Sec. 24] This section says that If any part of a single consideration for one or more objects, or any one or any part of any one of several consideration of a single object, is unlawful, the agreement is void. Illustration: i. Mr. A agrees to sell his car to Mr. B for consideration of certain sum of money alongwith an AK-47 Rifle. For Mr. A, there are two considerations, money and rifle. Since, procuring said rifle is unlawful, this agreement between Mr. A and Mr. B is void. Agreement without consideration [Sec. 25] This section says that an agreement without consideration is void. But, this section states exception to this rule. If the agreement is expressed in writing and registered under the law, and

it is made on account of natural love and affection, such agreement without consideration is declared to be valid agreement. It further says that if the agreement is a promise to compensate a person who has already voluntarily done something for the promisor, such agreement without consideration are valid contract. Illustration: i. Mr. A agrees to sell his property which is specified in the agreement to Mr. B with no consideration. There is neither near relation between Mr. A and Mr. B, nor they can prove that there was love and affection between them. The agreement is in writing, but, it is a void agreement as the element of love and affection is missing.

Agreement in restraint of marriage [Sec. 26] This section says that an agreement which restrains one or the other person from getting married is void. It is not necessary that there is mention or not of the other person. Illustration: i. A agrees to pay a sum of money to B if B does not marry in his life-time. This is void agreement. ii. A agrees to buy car of B for a certain value provided if B does not marry till the sale deed is executed. This agreement is void to the extent of marriage clause. Rest of the clauses, i.e., sale-purchase of car is valid contract.

Agreement in restraint of trade [Sec. 27] This section says that every agreement by which anyone is restrained from exercising a lawful profession, trade or business of any kind, is void to that extent only. Illustration: i. A runs business of sale-purchase of car in Delhi. B agrees to buy this business of A. Both agree that A will not carry this kind of business anywhere in India. This agreement is void as it restrains A from carrying a lawful profession. Agreements in restrain of legal proceedings [Sec. 28] This section says that every agreement, by which any party is restricted absolutely from enforcing his rights under any contract is void. It further says that that enforcement of right should be by the usual legal proceedings. It further says that if the agreement limits the time within which he may thus enforce his rights, such agreement too is void. Illustration:

i.

Mr. A has committed a breach in his contract with Mr. B. Mr. B has every right to claim compensation from Mr. A. Mr. A and Mr. B agrees that Mr. A will pay a certain amount to Mr. B provided Mr. B will not file a suit against him. This agreement is void as it restrains Mr. B from using his legal right to file a suit.

ii.

Mr. A gives a certain amount of money to Mr. B. They agree that Mr. B would return the money back within 30 days. They further agree that in case of failure on part of Mr. B, Mr. A can file any kind of suit against Mr. B within 6 months of date of agreement. This agreement is void as the law says that suit of recovery cant be only after expiry of 3 yrs. This agreement between Mr. A and Mr. B limits on Mr. As right to file a suit within 3 yrs.

Agreements void for uncertainty [Sec. 29] According to Sec. 29, those agreements that have no certain meaning, or that are not capable of being made certain, are void agreements. Illustration: i. Mr. A agrees to buy a property of Mr. B for a certain sum of money. Mr. B has a no. of properties. This agreement is void as the property which is stated to be bought or sold is not certain. Agreements by way of wager [Sec. 30] Wagering agreement is a kind of agreement enforceability of which depends upon happening or non-happening of an event. For example, Mr. A and Mr. B agree, if it rains tomorrow, Mr. A will give a certain sum of money to Mr. B, otherwise, Mr. B will give a certain sum of money to Mr. A. A wagering agreement is different from contingent contract. Sec. 30 of the Act declares such agreement to be void. These above stated statutory provisions have clearly stated the circumstances under which an agreement becomes void or void-ab-initio.

2. What do you mean by breach of contract? What remedies are available to the suffering party in case of breach of contract? Meaning of breach A breach occurs where a party to the contract fails to perform his/her obligations under the contract precisely & exactly. E.g., as per terms of the contract between Mr. A and Mr. B, Mr. A has to supply fresh vegetables to Mr. B. The supply was made, but, the vegetables were not fresh. This is breach on part of Mr. A. The term breach is not defined under Indian Contract Act. But, it has stated the effects that a breach carries. According to Sec. 39, when a party to a contract refuses to perform, or disables

himself from performing, his promise, and the other party may put an end to the contract. It further says that if the other party has signified his acquiescence in its continuance, the other party cant terminate the contract. Illustration: i. Mr. A agrees to supply fresh vegetables to Mr. B. The supply was made, but, the vegetables were not fresh. According to Sec. 39, its a kind of breach on part of Mr. A, Mr. B can put the contract to an end. If Mr. B takes up the supply of the vegetables, it implies that he has acquiesced the breach, now, he cant terminate the contract. Actual Breach and Anticipatory Breach The actual breach is a situation wherein one of the parties has caused the breach. The anticipatory breach is a situation wherein there is apprehension that breach might be committed. This apprehension may be expressed, or may be implied. Illustration: i. ii. The above illustration is example of actual breach. Mr. A agrees to supply goods produced by him to Mr. B. Mr. A declares that he will not be able to supply the goods. Though, the breach has not been committed yet, but, its a kind of anticipated breach which is expressed. iii. If in the above illustration, Mr. A has not made any necessary preparation for production of goods, and the date of performance is very near. It can be implied that Mr. A will not perform his obligation. Its a kind of breach wherein anticipation is implied.

Kinds of Breach Renunciation: Its a breach wherein the breaching party has renounced that he has no intention to perform his obligation. Breach of condition: Its a breach wherein the breaching party has failed to perform one of various obligations under the contract. Such obligation may be expressed, or may be implied; such obligation may not carry much importance in light of whole contractual terms. Fundamental breach: Its a breach wherein the breaching party has failed to perform either the contract in whole, or one of various obligations under the contract, but, the obligation carries importance in light of the whole contractual terms. Remedies of Breach

There is a latin maxim Ubi Jus, Ibi Remedium. It means where there is a right, there is a remedy. A contract would have been of no value if there were no remedies arising thereunder. The law provides that the suffering party has every right to seek remedies that lie under any principle of law of contract. Various remedies under Indian Contract Act are based on this latin maxim. Such remedies are: Termination of contract [Sec. 39, I.C.A.] The suffering party can terminate the contract. Such termination can be expressed or implied. Once the contract is terminated, it shall be considered as discharge of the contract. Now, none of the party can seek specific performance. Suit for damages [Sec. 73, I.C.A.] The suffering party might have suffered some loss due to breach. This party can terminate the contract and file a suit for damages. Suit for specific performance [Sec. 10 & 14, S.R.A.] The suffering party can elect the contract, may or may not perform his part of the contract, and file a suit of specific performance. Suit for Injunction [Sec. 36 to 40, S.R.A.] The suffering party can file a suit for seeking remedy of injunction. Illustration: i. Mr. A agrees to buy old car of Mr. B. On previous day of delivery, Mr. B refuses to sell the car. This is breach on part of Mr. B. Mr. A has following remedies available: ii. iii. Mr. A can terminate the contract u/s 39 of I.C.A. Mr. B can terminate the contract, and can file a suit for damages u/s 73 of I.C.A., if he has suffered any loss. iv. Mr. A can offer the payment of consideration amount to Mr. B, and can file a suit of specific performance against Mr. B. v. Mr. A can file a suit for seeking remedy of injunction against Mr. B. By order of injunction, the Court can restrain Mr. B from selling his car to any other person till the suit for specific performance or damages is decided. These remedies are laid down to discourage a party to the contract from committing breach of the contract. The objective of law is to bring the suffering party at a position wherein he might had been if the agreement had been performed.

3. What do you mean by discharge of contract? What are the various modes of discharge of contract? Meaning of discharge of contract Discharge of contract means a circumstance when contract ceases to be binding on the parties. It further means that now parties to the contract are not liable to perform their contractual obligations. This freedom is given by the law. But, it does not mean that parties have no other obligations or duties. They are given freedom from contractual obligations, but, not from other obligations, like, paying compensation/damage. Modes of Discharge of Contract i. By performance of contract [Sec. 37 to 39, I.C.A.] ii. By breach of contract [Sec. 39, I.C.A.] iii. By agreement or novation [sec. 62-63, I.C.A.] iv. Impossibility of performance [Sec. 56, I.C.A.] Performance of Contract Sec. 37 and 38 of I.C.A. lays down the rules on performance of contract. Sec. 37 lays obligation on parties to the contract to perform their respective promises. Once, contractual obligations are performed, contract is considered to be discharged. But, if one of the party is yet to perform his obligation, contract shall not be considered discharged unless the other party has acquiesced such non-performance. Though it is not stated expressly that once the contractual obligations are performed then contract is discharged. But, this meaning can be implied because once both the parties to the contract have performed their obligations, nothing is left on their part to perform. Hence, it may be implied that the contract is discharged. Discharge by breach of contract Sec. 39 of the Act says that when a party to a contract has refused to perform, or disabled himself from performing, his promise, the other party to the contract may put an end to the contract. It further says that if the other party has acquiesced such non-performance, than the other party cant put the contract to end.

..by performance sec 37 to 39.by breach sec 39..by agreement or novation sec 62-63..on ground of impossibility of performance sec 56 . 4. What are the various kinds of remedies of injunction? Discuss in detail. Can the suffering party claim injunction order in case of anticipatory breach? Sec. 36, preventive relief.sec. 37 temporary perpetual..sec. 38

5. Discuss the principles of offer and acceptance in light of a land-mark case decided by Privy Council.