A brief about rescinding contracts
Sana Salman Ali
Legal Expert in Banking Law | Expertise in SARFAESI, Recovery of Debt and Arbitration | Freelancer
A brief about rescinding contracts
This article is written by?Randeep Rana pursuing?Crack California Bar Examination – Test Prep Course. This article discusses the various nuances of rescinding contracts in an analytical manner.
Table of Contents
Introduction
The word “rescission” is derived from the Latin term ‘rescindere’, which means to cut or tear open. So, when a contract is torn open in a manner that the parties to the contract are restored back to the position that existed prior to the formation of the contract, it is called rescission of the contract. In effect, it may be compared to going back in time as if no contract was formed between the parties. Now there are certain circumstances like misrepresentation, fraud, etc. that may lead to the rescission of the contract between the parties. On the contrary, there are also situations where courts do not permit the contract to be rescinded. In this article, we will discuss analytically what is meant by the rescission of contracts, the usual circumstances when rescission of contracts are granted and situations where they are not granted by the courts and some relevant case laws on the rescission of contracts.
What is rescinding of contracts
Rescinding a contract implies that it is no longer recognized as legally binding on parties to the contract. So, basically, one party makes an effort to void the contract so that they do not need to fulfill the duties under the same. Rescinding of a contract can also be termed as unwinding of an agreement. However, a rescinding contract can be described broadly in two ways, as described below:-
Grounds for rescinding a contract
To have a contract rescinded, the court first determines if there is a valid reason to undo the contract. Just because the parties changed their minds, a contract is never rescinded as the same legally binds the parties. You can rescind a contract for:
When is the rescission of contracts not granted
It is pertinent to note that it is not always equitable to rescind a contract. Also, the right to rescind a contract is not an immediate right but the same is a discretionary power vested to the court. A court of law may deny a request to rescind a contract based on the below-mentioned circumstances:
领英推荐
Case laws on rescission of contracts
Various High Courts of India and the Supreme Court of India have opined various times on the topic through various cases. Some of them are mentioned below:-
Sri Pawan Kumar Dalmia v. Sri Biligowda (2021)
In this?case, the plaintiffs claimed that the defendants did not have sufficient title to the property and wanted to rescind the contract while claiming back the earnest money from them. The plaintiffs lost the case at the trial stage but later on at the appellate stage, the Karnataka High Court decided in favour of the plaintiff’s right to rescission of the contract as the defendants had misrepresentation themselves in having proper title to the property and ordered the payment of the earnest money back to the plaintiffs/ appellants.??
Bhupinder Kumar v. Angrej Singh (2009)
In this?case, the appellant had entered into an agreement to purchase land, but the respondent failed to execute and register the sale deed. The appellant filed a suit for specific performance, and the court decreed the suit in favour of the appellant. However, the appellant failed to deposit the balance sale price within the specified time, and the respondent filed an application for rescission of the contract. The executing court rescinded the contract, and the High Court upheld this decision.
The court referred to Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, which allows for the rescission of a contract for the sale of immovable property if the purchaser fails to pay the purchase money within the specified time. The court held that the trial court retains its power and jurisdiction even after the decree for specific performance, and it can extend the time for compliance with the decree.
In analyzing the facts of the case, the court found that the appellant had not provided sufficient material to justify an extension of time, and there was no evidence of the appellant’s inability to tender or deposit the balance sale consideration. Therefore, the executing court’s decision to decline an extension of time and rescind the contract was deemed just and equitable by the High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision.
Conclusion
Thus it can be said that rescission leads to the cancellation of the contract in a manner that erases all the effects of the contract. Anything that was exchanged between the parties like money or goods must be restored in an equitable manner. It acts as a legal remedy when one or both parties wish to undo the contract’s effects and return to their pre-contractual position.
References