Government of India
Bare Act As Per The Government of India

Section 13 of Indian Contract Act

13. “Consent” defined.— Two or more persons are said to consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense.

MCQs Based on Section 13 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

Q1. What is the meaning of “consent” under Section 13 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872?

A) When two parties agree to do something at the same time
B) When two parties agree upon the same thing in the same sense
C) When one party accepts the offer of another
D) When two or more persons sign the same contract

Correct Answer:B) When two parties agree upon the same thing in the same sense
Explanation: Section 13 defines consent as mutual agreement on the same thing in the same sense – known as consensus ad idem.

Q2. Which of the following Latin terms is associated with Section 13 (Consent)?

A) Caveat Emptor
B) Res Ipsa Loquitur
C) Consensus ad idem
D) Nemo dat quod non habet

Correct Answer:C) Consensus ad idem
Explanation: This means “meeting of minds” – both parties must understand and agree on the same subject in the same way.

Q3. If two parties misunderstand the subject matter of the agreement, then:

A) The contract is valid
B) The contract is void
C) The contract is enforceable with penalty
D) The contract is automatically registered

Correct Answer:B) The contract is void
Explanation: If there is no real consent due to different understanding, there is no valid agreement, making the contract void.

Q4. Which of the following situations shows proper “consent” under Section 13?

A) A agrees to sell a horse; B thinks he is buying a cow
B) A agrees to sell his red car; B agrees to buy the red car
C) A agrees to sell “his property”; B thinks it’s the Mumbai flat, A thinks it’s the Delhi flat
D) A agrees to sell something illegal; B agrees

Correct Answer:B) A agrees to sell his red car; B agrees to buy the red car
Explanation: Both parties have the same understanding about the same subject — this is valid consent.

Q5. Under Section 13, the absence of consent due to misunderstanding leads to:

A) Valid contract with error
B) Voidable contract
C) Void contract
D) Implied contract

Correct Answer:C) Void contract
Explanation: If there is no consent due to different understanding of the subject, the contract is void from the beginning.

Q6. Which section of the Indian Contract Act defines “consent”?

A) Section 12
B) Section 13
C) Section 14
D) Section 15

Correct Answer:B) Section 13
Explanation: Section 13 specifically defines the term “consent” in contract law.

Q7. What does “same sense” in Section 13 imply?

A) Same legal intention
B) Same timing
C) Same price
D) Same mode of delivery

Correct Answer:A) Same legal intention
Explanation: “Same sense” means both parties understand the agreement in the same legal meaning and context.

Section 13: Condition-Based Practice Questions

Q1: Condition – Same Thing and Same Sense

Problem: A agrees to sell his car to B. Both A and B understand the car being sold is a red sedan. However, A delivers a blue sedan to B instead.

Question: Does Section 13 of the Indian Contract Act apply here? Is there valid consent between A and B?

Answer: No, there is no valid consent under Section 13. Consent requires agreement on the same thing in the same sense. Since B expected a red sedan but received a blue one, they did not agree on the same thing. Therefore, there is no valid consent, and the contract is voidable at B’s option.

Q2: Condition – Agreement on Same Thing but Different Sense

Problem: A agrees to sell his “house” to B. A means the house in Delhi, but B thinks he is buying the house in Mumbai.

Question: Is there consent as defined under Section 13? What is the status of the contract?

Answer: No, there is no consent because the parties did not agree upon the same thing in the same sense. The subject matter was different in the minds of A and B. Therefore, there is no valid consent and the contract is void due to lack of “meeting of minds.”

Q3: Condition – Agreement with Fraud or Misrepresentation

Problem: A agrees to sell his painting to B. A fraudulently represents the painting to be an original, but it is a copy. B agrees to buy it based on this belief.

Question: Does B’s consent satisfy Section 13’s definition of consent?

Answer: No, B’s consent is not free or genuine. Although there is agreement on the same thing, the consent is obtained by fraud (Section 14). Section 13 requires genuine agreement in the same sense. Here, consent is vitiated, making the contract voidable at B’s option.

Section 13: Problem-Based Practice Questions

Q1: Problem on Different Understanding

Problem: A owns two farms – one in Punjab and another in Haryana. He agrees to sell “his farm” to B. A intends to sell the farm in Punjab, while B believes the farm in Haryana is being sold. Later, A delivers the Punjab farm, but B refuses to accept.

Question: Is there a valid contract between A and B under Section 13? Why or why not?

Answer: No valid contract exists because there was no true consent. Under Section 13, both parties must agree upon the same thing in the same sense. Since A and B misunderstood which farm was being sold, the agreement lacks “consensus ad idem.” Therefore, the contract is void due to lack of consent.

Q2: Problem on Consent to Sale of Goods

Problem: A agrees to sell 100 bags of wheat to B. B agrees, but he believes the wheat will be delivered next month. A intends to deliver immediately. After delivery, B refuses to accept the wheat.

Question: Does this difference in understanding about delivery time affect the consent under Section 13?

Answer: If the delivery time was an essential term of the contract and both parties did not agree on it, then the consent is not in the same sense, leading to no valid contract. However, if delivery time was not a condition, then the agreement on the sale is valid. So, the question depends on whether delivery time was a key term. If yes, no valid consent; if no, contract valid.

Q3: Problem on Consent to Sale of Property

Problem: A verbally agrees to sell his flat to B. Both agree on price and location. But A thinks he is selling the flat on the first floor; B thinks he is buying the flat on the second floor.

Question: Is there valid consent under Section 13?

Answer: No, there is no valid consent because the parties are not agreeing upon the same thing in the same sense. The flat on the first floor is different from the flat on the second floor. This lack of “meeting of minds” means no valid contract exists.

Final Thoughts

Meaning of Consent (Section 13)

As per Section 13 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872: “Two or more persons are said to consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense.”

This means, for any contract to be valid, both (or all) parties must agree on the same subject, in the same manner, and with the same understanding. This concept is also called “consensus ad idem”, which is a Latin phrase meaning “meeting of minds”.

Importance of Consent in Contract

Understanding with Example:

Example 1 (Proper Consent): A agrees to sell his gold ring to B. B agrees to buy that same gold ring. Here, both A and B are agreeing upon the same thing in same sense. So, it is a valid consent.

Example 2 (No Consent – Different Understanding): A has two houses – one in Delhi and one in Mumbai. A agrees to sell “his house” to B. A thinks he is selling the Delhi house, but B thinks he is buying the Mumbai house. Here, they are not agreeing on the same thing. So, there is no real consent. Contract is invalid.

Key Points to Remember:

Conclusion

Section 13 of the Indian Contract Act plays a very important role in contract law. It ensures that all parties involved in a contract understand and agree to the same terms. This section highlights that just saying “yes” is not enough — both parties must mean exactly the same thing. Without such agreement, there is no contract.