(i) Tanishka purchased two flats in Ansal VVIP Homes at Greater Noida, one at Block A and another at Block D. She also entered in contract with…

(i) Section 20 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 provides, where both the parties to an agreement are under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement, there is a bilateral mistake. In such a case, the agreement is void. Bilateral mistakes may be as to the quality, existence, identity, title, price or quantity of the subject matter. In the instant case, Tanishka purchased two flats in Ansal VVIP Homes at Greater Noida in Block A and Block D. She also entered in contract with Sakshi to letout the flat at Block D. But at that time the Block D was completely damaged by earthquake unknown to both Tanishka and Sakshi. Sakshi demanded the possession of flat at Block A. Here, the matter discussed in above problem is concerned with bilateral mistake. As in case of bilateral mistake, contract is void, both Tanishka and Sakshi are not bound with this contract. Hence Sakshi cannot demand the possession of flat at Block A from Tanishka. (ii) According to section 16 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a contract is said to be induced by ‘undue influence’ where the relations subsisting between the parties are such that one of the parties is in a position to dominate the will of the other and he uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage over the other. When consent to an agreement is caused by undue influence, the contract is voidable at the option of the party, whose consent was so caused. Hence, the contract between Mr. A and Mr. B is voidable at the option of Mr. B as it was induced by undue influence by Mr. A and therefore Mr. B can sue Mr. A.