Wasi sold his factory carrying motorcycles manufacturing plants to Tipu stating its production capacity of 200,000 units annually. Tipu, after buying the factory came to know that the contract was based on false claim of the stated production capacity.
This contract is voidable. It might be valid in princple, but there is one undeniable fact, and that is that Wasi misrepresented the production capacity of the plant. Tusi could easily render this contract void in a civil court.
A music hall was rented out for a series of concerts. The hall caught fire before the date of first Concert. Explain the nature of contract with respect to executed/executor/valid or voidable contract.
This contract is valid. The principles of the contract are valid: the hall was in good condition, and the parts of the agreement willfully signed the contract. The fact that the hall shortly after caught fire is not anyone's fault in particular.
A threatens B to kill if he does not sell his BMW worth Rs. 1.65M to the former for Rs 1M. B, to save his life, agreed to sell his BMW to A and receives the payments. Is this a valid contract?
This contract is void, from start. The reason is simply that threatening to kill a person in order to make this person act as one wishes is an illegal act. Person B did not have any other option but to accept the terms, since his life was at stake. This contract would immediately struck down in court, and person A would have to face criminal justice.