Skip to content

CS Professional · Drafting, Pleadings and Appearances · Commercial Contract Management

Nisha agrees to pay Omkar Rs 1,00,000 if Omkar marries Priya. Later, Priya marries Qadir. Nisha says the contract is void, while Omkar argues that Qadir may die and Priya may later marry him. Which view is correct under the Act?

Nisha is correct. Under Section 34, once Priya marries someone else, her marrying Omkar is treated as impossible, even though the other husband might die. Under Section 32, a contingent contract whose event becomes impossible is void, so no payment is due.

  1. ANisha's view, because Omkar's marriage to Priya is considered impossible once she marries anotherCorrect
  2. BOmkar's view, because any future possibility keeps the contract alive
  3. COmkar's view, because contingent contracts never become void
  4. DNeither, because the contract is enforceable at once

Explanation

Section 34 treats an event dependent on a person's future conduct as impossible when that person does something making it impossible to act so within any definite time or otherwise than under further contingencies. The illustration is exactly this fact pattern. Section 32 then makes the contract void. Omkar's remote possibility is the very argument the section rejects.

Did you get it right without looking?

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

Practise Commercial Contract ManagementFree diagnostic mock

More Commercial Contract Management questions