Meaning of coercion
Coercion refers to the act of using force, threats, intimidation, or undue pressure to compel someone to do something against their will or to prevent them from taking a particular action. It involves exerting power or control over another individual, often with the aim of influencing their behaviour, decisions, or actions. Coercion can take various forms and may occur in different contexts, such as interpersonal relationships, employment, business dealings, or even on a larger societal scale. It is important to recognize that coercion is generally considered unethical and unlawful, as it violates an individual’s autonomy and right to make choices freely without fear of harm or negative consequences. In the legal context, coercion law may refer to specific actions that are prohibited by law, such as criminal offenses like blackmail, extortion, or threats of violence. Additionally, coercion can invalidate certain contracts if one party is forced into the agreement against their will, rendering the contract voidable.
Section 15 of the Indian contract Act, 1872
Coercion is defined under Section 15 of the Indian Contract act,1872 as:
“The committing, or threatening to commit, any act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code 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.”
In simpler terms, coercion in the context of contracts refers to situations where one party is forced or compelled to enter into a contract against their will, either through threats, intimidation, or by detaining their property unlawfully.
Elements of coercion in Indian contract act, 1872
- Committing or threatening to commit any act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code: This element covers situations where one party uses or threatens to use force, violence, or any other action prohibited by criminal law to compel the other party to enter into a contract. The act or threat must be forbidden by the Indian Penal Code to qualify as coercion.
- Unlawful detaining or threatening to detain any property: This element involves the use or threat of unlawfully detaining someone’s property to coerce them into entering a contract. Unlawful detention means holding or depriving a person of their property without lawful authority.
- Intention to cause any person to enter into an agreement: Coercion must be with the specific intention of forcing the other party to enter into a contract against their will. Mere use of force or threats without the intention to cause someone to enter into an agreement may not amount to coercion under the Indian Contract Act.
Effect of Coercion under Indian Contract Act, 1872
As per Section 19 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872:
“When consent to an agreement is caused by coercion, fraud or misrepresentation, the agreement is a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused.”
Therefore, the effect of coercion is that it renders the contract voidable at the option of the party who was subjected to coercion. This means that the coerced party has the right to choose whether to affirm the contract or to reject it and have it declared as void. If the contract has been induced by coercion, the affected party must exercise their right to avoid the contract within a reasonable time after the coercion has ceased. If they continue to perform under the contract without exercising their right to avoid it promptly, the contract may become valid and binding. If the coerced party chooses to avoid the contract, both parties must restore any benefits or consideration they received from each other under the contract. In essence, they must return each other to the position they were in before the contract was made.
Landmark judgements on coercion under Indian Contract Act
- Ranganayakamma vs. Alwar Setti (1900): In this case, the court emphasized that for coercion to be a ground to avoid a contract, the act of coercion must be the ‘dominant’ cause that induces a person to enter into the contract.
- Abdul Razzak Sahib vs. Mahomed Cassum & Co. (1917): This case clarified that coercion can arise not only from acts or threats but also from the unlawful detention of property. The court held that the threat of preventing someone from carrying on their trade could constitute coercion.
- Roshan Lal vs. Madan Lal (1936): In this case, the court stated that even if the coercion was exercised by a third party, it would still be a valid ground for avoiding the contract.
- Mushtaq Ahmad vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir (1991): The court clarified that if the coercion is the sole cause for entering into a contract, the party subjected to coercion has the right to avoid the contract.
Conclusion
It is important to understand that coercion is a legal concept with specific criteria, and it must be proven by the party seeking to avoid the contract. Mere pressure or persuasion, which does not meet the legal definition of coercion, may not have the same effect on the contract.
