Presumption of Undue Influence

There are two presumption under Undue Influence, The effect of the presumption is that once it is shown that the defendant was in a position to dominate the will of the plaintiff it will be presumed that he must have used his position to obtain an unfair advantage.

• Pardanasheen Women
• Unconscionable Bargain (Catching Bargain)

• Pardanasheen Women: Pardanasheen Women is one who is observing parda, burkha or veil.  Practically, who observe seclusion (separation) from society not mixing in society with stranger expert family members.

     She is given special protection by law as she is not aware of business and can likely be deceived by anyone.  So any transaction with pardansheen women if she challenged its validity it is presumed that undue influence was there.  Burden of proof is on the other party to prove, how there was no undue influence.

• Unconscionable Bargain (Catching Bargain): Where one of the parties to a contract is in a position to dominate the will of the other and the contract is apparently unconscionable that consent must have been obtained by undue influence. The bargain is unconscious.

Generally the price of consideration is too low or negligible or its so unreasonable, that no person can sale or convey.  Bargain or price shall be fixed by the parties, Court shall not sit over a bargain.  It is for the party to decide the price or consideration.  It is against conscience.  In such cases undue influence is presumed.  Burden of proof is on defendant.

• Rescission on Contract:

Section 19A provides power to a court to set aside contract induced by Undue Influence-

When consent to an agreement is caused by undue influence, the agreement is voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused.

• Case Law:

1. Allcard Vs. Skinner[1]

Fact:          Plaintiff was a middle aged lady and was a owner of huge property.  Defendant was a priest, a religious head of a Church.  The plaintiff became a num and accepted that so as to achieve spiritual benefit in the next world she shall donate her property to the Church.  So in presence of religious head, she gifted away her property to Church.  She continued to be a num for a long time, but after 9 years she gave up her job as num and disassociated herself and accepted Roman Catholic and started her unusual life.  But the property was already gifted away.  So she challenged the validity of gift deed on the ground of undue influence and the consent was not free consent.

Hence the principal of undue influence is accepted in this case.  Influence of one mind over another is subtle while religious influence is more subtle (Powerful). In this case the consent was not a free consent due to undue influence.

But as there was undue delay, the claim of plaintiff was dismissed.

Delay because of   -           a) She was performing religious order for 9 years.

1. b) She claimed after 5 years when she left it, so her

      Claim failed.

• Conclusion: There are certain relationship which subsists between the persons, where one can dominate the will of another. i.e. Company and Directors, firm and partners, master and servant, guardian and ward, teacher and student, doctor and patient, advocate and clients etc. in such cases there is a presumption in law that there is undue influence.

[1] 1887, Chancery Court.