Section 2(i) of the Indian Contracts Act 1872 defines countervailable agreements as such that are valid for as long as one or both parties can decide to cancel their agreement. Most of the time, cases relating to a countervailable contract relate to a situation where one of the parties has not obtained free agreement. Therefore, if the party accepts the terms of the contract, it remains valid, and if they do not, the contract between them terminates. The different types of agreements expressly annulled by the ICA can be interpreted as follows: in other words, the agreement cannot deprive both parties of the legal rights conferred on both parties under the legislation in force. These sections provide that any contract in which the approval of a party is not voluntarily sought is questionable at the choice of that party. In such circumstances, consent may be obtained through coercion, misrepresentation or unlawful influence, which is contrary to the free consent of the law. For example, if Coca Cola or McDonald`s grants their franchise to a particular company, it may be subject to the condition of not selling competing products during the period for which the franchise agreement is in effect. 1. Coercion (section 15): “coercion” means the commission or threat of an act prohibited by the Indian Penal Code under 45,1860, or the unlawful detention or threat of possession of property to the detriment of a person, for the purpose of getting a person to enter into an agreement. For example, “A” threatens to draw “B” if he does not pay it a debt it owes to “B”. “B” releases “A” under threat.
Since the release was made by coercion, such an authorization is not valid. The derogation from this section is defined in the provision of § 27 concerning the sale of business property or companies that prevents a buyer from making similar transactions with other sellers. According to sections 201 to 210, an agency can terminate in different ways: contract law in India is governed by the Indian Contracts Act of 1872. However, the Contracts Act does not purport to codify all contract law, but it expressly maintains any commercial usurbation or incident of a contract that is not inconsistent with the provisions of the Act. . . .