Under Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a valid contract requires free consent between parties competent to contract, lawful consideration, and a lawful object, and must not be one the law expressly declares void -- every element is separately defined in the Act and each has its own body of case law on when it is missing or defective.
The five essentials under Section 10
Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (ICA) provides that all agreements are contracts if made by
the free consent of parties competent to contract, for a lawful consideration and with a lawful object, and
are not expressly declared void by the Act. Section 11 defines who is competent to contract -- a person who
has attained the age of majority under the Indian Majority Act, 1875, is of sound mind, and is not
disqualified from contracting by any law they are subject to.
What makes consent “free”
Section 13 defines “consent” as parties agreeing upon the same thing in the same sense, and
Section 14 defines “free consent” as consent not caused by coercion (Section 15), undue influence
(Section 16), fraud (Section 17), misrepresentation (Section 18), or mistake (Sections 20-22). Section 19
makes a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was obtained through coercion, fraud, or
misrepresentation -- meaning the affected party can choose to enforce or rescind it. Undue influence under
Section 16 is particularly relevant in family and property transactions -- where one party is in a position
to dominate the other's will, such as a relationship of trust between family members, courts scrutinize the
resulting agreement more closely, and the burden can shift to the dominant party to prove the transaction was
fair.
Agreements the Act declares void
Sections 23-30 identify agreements that are void even if the other essentials are met -- including
agreements in restraint of marriage (Section 26), agreements in restraint of trade (Section 27, subject to
narrow statutory exceptions such as the sale of goodwill), agreements in restraint of legal proceedings
(Section 28), agreements too uncertain to be enforced (Section 29), and wagering agreements (Section 30).
Section 23 separately voids any agreement whose consideration or object is unlawful -- forbidden by law,
fraudulent, injurious to another's person or property, or opposed to public policy -- a residual category
courts continue to apply to novel fact patterns, including some categories of online and cross-border
agreements that did not exist when the Act was originally drafted in 1872.
Is an oral contract enforceable in India?
Generally yes -- the Indian Contract Act, 1872 does not require a contract to be in writing unless a
specific law requires it (for example, contracts for the sale of immovable property must be registered under
the Registration Act, 1908). An oral contract that satisfies Section 10’s essentials is enforceable, but
proving its terms can be harder without a written record.
Can a minor enter into a valid contract in India?
No -- Section 11 excludes minors (persons below 18, or below 21 if a guardian is appointed by court) from
contractual capacity, and Indian courts have held that a contract with a minor is void from the outset (not
merely voidable), with limited exceptions such as contracts for necessities supplied to a minor.
What is the difference between a void and a voidable contract?
A void agreement (Section 2(g)) has no legal effect at all and cannot be enforced by either party. A
voidable contract (Section 2(i)) remains valid and enforceable unless and until the party whose consent was
improperly obtained chooses to rescind it -- the choice belongs to that party, not the other side.
