Section 14 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Section 14 defines the quality of consent the Act cares about. In the Act's words, consent is said to be free when it is not caused by coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake. This article explains the five factors, the "but for" test in the second paragraph, and how the section links to the rest of the chapter.
Consent is said to be free when it is not caused by (1) coercion (s.15), (2) undue influence (s.16), (3) fraud (s.17), (4) misrepresentation (s.18), or (5) mistake, subject to sections 20, 21 and 22. Consent is said to be so caused when it would not have been given but for the existence of such coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake. Section 14 has no illustrations in the text.
The five factors
| # | Factor | Defined in | What section 14 adds |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Coercion | Section 15 | "as defined in section 15" |
| 2 | Undue influence | Section 16 | "as defined in section 16" |
| 3 | Fraud | Section 17 | "as defined in section 17" |
| 4 | Misrepresentation | Section 18 | "as defined in section 18" |
| 5 | Mistake | Sections 20, 21 and 22 | "subject to the provisions of sections 20, 21 and 22" |
Section 14 itself does not define the first four; it points to the sections that do. For the fifth, it says mistake is "subject to the provisions of sections 20, 21 and 22", so the effect of mistake is governed by those sections and not by section 14 alone. If you are drafting an agreement and want to reduce the chance of a later dispute about consent, our agreement drafting service can help with the recitals, disclosures and acknowledgments.
"Consent is said to be free"
The section uses the Act's own term. The test is a negative one: consent is said to be free when it is not caused by any of the five factors. The Act does not describe consent as free in any broader sense, and we use the phrase only in its statutory meaning. This builds on the definition of consent in section 13: two or more persons consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense. See our article on sections 12 and 13.
The "but for" test
The second paragraph reads: "Consent is said to be so caused when it would not have been given but for the existence of such coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake."
This tells you the link required between the factor and the consent. It is not enough that coercion, fraud or another factor exists somewhere in the dealings. The consent must be caused by it, in the sense that it would not have been given but for it. Section 19 later repeats this idea in its Explanation: a fraud or misrepresentation which did not cause the consent of the party does not render the contract voidable.
So two questions arise in any case:
- Was there coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake, in the senses defined?
- Would the consent have been given without it?
If the answer to the first is yes and to the second is no, the consent is "so caused".
What follows when consent is not free
Section 14 does not itself say what happens next. The consequences are in other sections, which you can use as a map:
| Factor | Effect stated in the Act |
|---|---|
| Coercion, fraud, misrepresentation | Agreement is a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused (section 19) |
| Undue influence | Agreement is a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused; the Court may set it aside (section 19A) |
| Mistake of both parties as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement | Agreement is void (section 20) |
| Mistake as to a law in force in India | Contract is not voidable (section 21) |
| Mistake of one party as to a matter of fact | Contract is not voidable merely because of it (section 22) |
For the group as a whole, see our overview of free consent, sections 13 to 22.
A modern example (ours, not the Act's)
Chetan, a small manufacturer, signs a supply contract with Falguni Industries after Falguni's manager falsely tells him that a rival supplier has gone out of business and that this is the only source of a component. Chetan would not have signed but for that statement. If the statement fits the definition of fraud in section 17 (or misrepresentation under section 18), Chetan's consent was caused by it under section 14, and section 19 then makes the contract voidable at Chetan's option.
Now change the facts: the manager's statement is true, but Chetan signed because the price was attractive. There is no factor in section 14's list, and the consent is not caused by any of them. Section 14 has nothing to say.
What can the parties change?
Section 14 is a definition, and the parties cannot change what the Act means by it. They can, however, reduce risk in how the contract is made: put key representations in writing, include warranties and disclosures, allow time to read and take advice, and keep records showing that consent was given on informed terms. Whether a clause that attempts to exclude liability for these factors works depends on the specific sections of the Act and on other law, which this article does not cover.
Practical points
- Think "but for". If a party says consent was caused by a factor, ask whether the contract would have been signed without it.
- Document the basis of the deal. A written record of what was said before signing helps both sides.
- Do not pressure. Threats, abuse of influence and false statements put the contract at risk.
- Act promptly on a defect. If you believe your consent was caused by one of the five factors, take advice quickly; sections 19 and 19A describe the option you hold.
Need help with consent in your contracts?
If you want your agreements to record clearly what each party was told, what they relied on and what they agreed, our agreement drafting team can help you structure the document and the surrounding process.
Key takeaways
- Consent is said to be free when it is not caused by coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake (s.14).
- Mistake is subject to sections 20, 21 and 22.
- Consent is "so caused" when it would not have been given but for the factor.
- Section 14 defines; sections 19 and 19A and 20 to 22 give the consequences.
Read next
- Section 15: coercion
- Section 19: voidable agreements where consent is not valid
- Sections 20 to 22: mistake
- Free consent: sections 13 to 22
Disclaimer: Based on the text of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 as consulted on 1 October 2026. Many questions under this Act turn on case law and on the wording of the particular contract, which this article does not cover. It is general information, not legal advice; check the official text and take advice before acting.