Q. ‘A’ having advanced money to his son ‘B’ during his minority, upon B’s coming of age, obtains by misuse of parental influence, a bond from ‘B’ for a bigger amount than the sum due in respect of the advance. Is ‘B’ bound by the bond?
Bihar Higher Judicial Service (Additional District Judge) Exam. 1991 U.P. Civil Services (P.T.) Exam. 2002
Ans: No, ‘B’ is not bound by the bond—Section 16 (Undue Influence-defined) AND Section 19A (Power to set aside contract nduced by undue influence).
Reasons: A contract is said to be induced by undue influence when one of the parties to the contract is in a position to dominate the Will of other and he uses the position to obtain an unfair advantage over the other—Section 16(1)
Further the relevant part of Section 16(2) provides that undue influence may be presumed to exist when one party holds a real or apparent authority over the other or when he stands in a fiduciary relationship to the other (for example—relation of father and son and Advocate and Client).
Again relevant part Section 19A provides that when a contract is made as a result of undue influence, the contract is voidable at the option of the party whose consent has been obtained by undue influence, and such a contract may be set aside by the court.
From the perusal of all relevant provision it is crystal clear that in the given problem ‘B’ is not bound by the bond obtained by his father and can get it set aside by the court. It is also clear from the Illustration (a) of Section 16 on which this problem is based and which reads as follows—“’A’ having advanced money to his son, ‘B’, during his minority, upon B’s coming of age obtains, by misuse of parental influence, a bond from ‘B’ for a greater amount than the sum due in respect of the advance. ‘A’ employs undue influence”.
Source: Problems & solutions on Civil Law by Kishor Prasad