Site navigation

Where no separate statute prohibits the transaction, how does Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act treat an ordinary wagering agreement?

Question and options

Where no separate statute prohibits the transaction, how does Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act treat an ordinary wagering agreement?

  1. A voidable agreement that either party may affirm

  2. A void agreement that Section 30 does not itself prohibit

  3. An enforceable agreement if made in writing

  4. A criminally prohibited agreement by virtue of Section 30 alone

Answer and explanation

Correct answer: B - A void agreement that Section 30 does not itself prohibit

Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 makes agreements by way of wager void and bars suits to recover what is won, but it does not make them illegal. The Supreme Court held in Gherulal Parakh v. Mahadeodas Maiya (1959) that a collateral agreement in aid of a wager is therefore not unlawful under Section 23. Only a separate law, such as a State gambling statute, can prohibit the activity itself.

Practice for these exams

Related exam syllabi

More solved explanations in Lawful object & void agreements