Skip to content

CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Contract Law

Neha and Imran contract on the mistaken belief about a foreign law that is not in force in India. Imran alone is mistaken as to a matter of fact concerning the subject matter, and Neha knows nothing of it. Which combination of Sections 21 and 22 is correctly stated?

A mistake about a law not in force in India is treated like a mistake of fact under Section 21, and under Section 22 a contract is not voidable merely because one party was under a mistake of fact. So unilateral mistake alone does not make it voidable.

  1. ABoth mistakes make the contract voidable at Imran's option
  2. BNeither mistake can ever be relevant under any section
  3. CThe foreign-law mistake is treated as a mistake of fact, and a mistake of fact by one party alone does not merely by itself make the contract voidableCorrect
  4. DA mistake of foreign law is treated as a mistake of Indian law, and a one-sided mistake of fact makes the contract void

Explanation

Under Section 21, a mistake as to a law not in force in India has the same effect as a mistake of fact. Under Section 22, a contract is not voidable merely because one party was under a mistake as to a matter of fact. Combined, such a unilateral mistake does not by itself render the contract voidable.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Contract Law shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Contract LawFree diagnostic mock

More Contract Law questions