mistake
The Indian Contract Act treats mistake in three ways. If both parties are under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement (bilateral mistake), the agreement is void, for example where the goods sold had already perished. A mistake by only one party (unilateral mistake) does not make the contract voidable. A mistake as to Indian law does not affect the contract, but a mistake as to foreign law is treated as a mistake of fact.
An erroneous opinion about the value of the thing is not a mistake of fact. Mistake as to the identity of the other party, where identity is material, can make the agreement void.
Example
The cargo had been destroyed before the sale without either party knowing; the bilateral mistake made the agreement void under s.20.
In Indian law
- Sections 20, 21 and 22, Indian Contract Act, 1872
- Couturier v. Hastie (House of Lords, 1856): goods that had perished
See also
free consent · void agreement · res extincta · mistake of fact
Read more in the study notes
- General exceptions: mistake, accident, necessity and incapacity (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita)
- Rule of law and droit administratif (Administrative Law)
- Rights of a banker: lien, set-off, appropriation and charges (Banking Law)
- Dishonour, noting and protest, acceptance for honour, material alteration, special rules of evidence and bills in sets (Banking Law)
- Concurrent and consecutive sentences; appeals, revision and reference (Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita)
- Crime: meaning, elements and stages (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita)