Chikkam Ammiraju v. Chikkam Seshhamma (1916)
Author: Gulzar Hashmi Location: India Published: 25 Oct 2025
Quick Summary
This case asks a simple question: if someone says “I will kill myself unless you sign,” is your consent free? The Madras High Court said no. Such a threat breaks free consent and counts as coercion under Section 15 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The release deed signed by the wife and son was treated as voidable because it was obtained by pressure of this kind.
- Holding: Threat to commit suicide = coercion (S.15 ICA).
- Citation: 1916 SCC OnLine Mad 74.
Issues
- Does a threat to commit suicide fall within “coercion” under Section 15 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872?
- Does such a threat vitiate free consent and render the agreement voidable?
Rules
- Section 15, ICA: Coercion includes committing or threatening to commit any act forbidden by the IPC.
- IPC context: While suicide itself was not punishable, abetment of suicide (S.306) and attempt to commit suicide (S.309) were punishable. An act may be forbidden even if not punishable in itself.
- Effect on consent: A threat that would shake the will of a reasonable person (here, a wife and a son) destroys free consent.
Therefore, using a suicide threat to secure a deed or contract is coercion within Section 15.
Facts (Timeline)
Arguments
Appellants (Wife & Son)
- Threat of suicide is an act forbidden by law when used to obtain consent.
- Such a threat overbears will; consent is not free.
- Release deed must be treated as voidable.
Respondents (Father & Brother)
- Suicide itself was not punishable; hence threat to commit it is outside Section 15.
- Deed was signed; it should stand.
Judgment
The Madras High Court allowed the appeal. It ruled that a threat to commit suicide, used to obtain an agreement, is coercion within Section 15 ICA. Even though suicide itself was not punishable, the IPC forbids conduct around it (like abetment and attempt). The deed was therefore voidable at the plaintiffs’ option.
Ratio
Threats of self-harm can be “acts forbidden by law.” If such a threat is used to secure consent, it is coercion under Section 15. Consent obtained in this way is not free, and the resulting agreement is voidable.
Why It Matters
- Protects parties from extreme emotional pressure tactics.
- Clarifies that “forbidden by law” is broader than “punishable.”
- Guides courts on consent where self-harm threats are involved.
Key Takeaways
Threat to commit suicide = coercion (S.15 ICA).
Consent given under such threat is not free.
Agreement is voidable at the victim’s option.
“Forbidden by law” ≠ only “punishable.”
IPC S.306 & S.309 frame the legal background.
Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook
Mnemonic: “Suicide Signal Spoils Signature.”
- Signal: A suicide threat is a legal red flag (forbidden by law).
- Spoils: It ruins free consent.
- Signature: The signed deed becomes voidable.
IRAC Outline
Issue: Does a suicide threat amount to coercion under S.15 ICA?
Rule: S.15 includes acts/threats forbidden by IPC; abetment (S.306) and attempt (S.309) relate to suicide.
Application: The threat placed unbearable pressure on the wife and son; they signed without free will.
Conclusion: Threat equals coercion; deed is voidable.
Glossary
- Coercion (S.15 ICA): Pressure using acts/threats forbidden by IPC to get consent.
- Voidable: Valid until the aggrieved party chooses to set it aside.
- Forbidden by law: Conduct the law disallows, even if not directly punishable.
FAQs
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now