Indian Contract Act — Section 17
'Fraud' defined
'Fraud' means and includes any of the following acts committed by a party to a contract, or with his connivance, or by his agent', with intent to deceive another party thereto or his agent, or to induce him to enter into the contract:—(1) the suggestion, as a fact, of that which is not true, by one who does not believe it to be true; (2) the active concealment of a fact by one having knowledge or belief of the fact; (3) a promise made without any intention of performing it; (4) any other act fitted to deceive; (5) any such act or omission as the law specially declares to be fraudulent. Explanation.— Mere silence as to facts likely to affect the willingness of a person to enter into a contract is not fraud, unless the circumstances of the case are such that, regard being had to them, it is the duty of the person keeping silence to speaks, or unless his silence, is, in itself, equivalent to speech. Illustrations (a) A sells, by auction, to B, a horse which A knows to be unsound. A says nothing to B about the horse's unsoundness. This is not fraud in A. (b) B is A's daughter and has just come of age. Here the relation between the parties would make it A's duty to tell B if the horse is unsound. (c) B says to A—"If you do not deny it, I shall assume that the horse is sound". A says nothing. Here, A's silence is equivalent to speech. (d) A and B, being traders, enter upon a contract. A has private information of a change in prices which would affect B's willingness to proceed with the contract. A is not bound to inform B.
Follow cited cases · Browse courts and years · Research topics
Judgments citing Section 17
- Judgment · High Court · 2026
- Judgment · High Court · 2026
- SRI. N. NARAYANASWAMY v. SRI. N. VENKATESH
- SRI. N. NARAYANASWAMY v. SRI. N. VENKATESH
- NOS.2 TO 5 ARE v. 6 AND 7 ARE
- SRI. N. NARAYANASWAMY v. SRI. N. VENKATESH
- SRI. N. NARAYANASWAMY v. SRI. N. VENKATESH
- BIKASH KUMAR SETHIA v. ON THE DEATH OF AZIZUR RAHMAN HIS LEGAL HEIRS TAHMINA KHANOOM & Ors.
- Jaipur Development Authority v. Suresh Bugalia
- Jaipur Development Authority v. Suresh Bugalia
- Applications under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India v. State of Odisha & Ors.
- Applications under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India v. State of Odisha & Ors.
- Rajesh Kumar Nayyar v. State of HP
- OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYNAGPUR BENCH : NAGPURWrit Petition No.7045/2025 Sunil Babarao Gawande v. State of Maharashtra & Anr.
- Gopal Prasad Sinha v. The State of Jharkhand
- Palwinder Singh v. NIDHI GUPTA, J
- Gopal Prasad Sinha v. The State of Jharkhand
- Sri Raja Velugoti Madana Gopala Krishna Yachendra Died v. Padidam Jayasree & Ors.
- Jyoti Sejwani v. The Rajasthan Housing Board & Ors
- Jyoti Sejwani v. The Rajasthan Housing Board
Text reproduced from the public statutes on which the corpus is built. Verify against the official Gazette before relying on it. This is statute reference, not legal advice.