Indian Contract Act, 1872 · Preliminary
Section 2: Interpretation-clause
In this Act the following words and expressions are used in the following senses, unless a contrary intention appears from the context:—
(a) When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal;
(b) When the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted. A proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise;
(c) The person making the proposal is called the "promisor", and the person accepting the proposal is called the "promisee";
(d) When, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee or any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise;
(e) Every promise and every set of promises, forming the consideration for each other, is an agreement;
(f) Promises which form the consideration or part of the consideration for each other are called reciprocal promises;
(g) An agreement not enforceable by law is said to be void;
(h) An agreement enforceable by law is a contract;
(i) An agreement which is enforceable by law at the option of one or more of the parties thereto, but not at the option of the other or others, is a voidable contract;
(j) A contract which ceases to be enforceable by law becomes void when it ceases to be enforceable.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 15 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 2
-
Rutu Mihir Panchal & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Constitutionality of ss.34(1), 47(1)(a)(i) and 58(1)(a)(i) of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 prescribing pecuniary jurisdictions of the district, state and national commissions on the basis of value of goods and…
-
Yash Raj Films Private Limited v. Afreen Fatima Zaidi & Anr.
Respondent no.1-complainant decided to go to watch a movie on the silver screen with her family. However, she found that the movie did not contain the song, which was widely circulated for promoting and publicising the…
-
N N Global Mercantile (P) Ltd. v. Indo Unique Flame Ltd. (2023) 7
The issue at hand arose in the context of three statutes; the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, and the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The Stamp Act imposes duty on “instruments”.…
- Cox and Kings Ltd. v. Sap India Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.
- M/s TATA MOTORS LTD. v. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF
- M/s N. N. GLOBAL MERCANTILE PRIVATE LIMITED v. M/s
- Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited v. Jsw Energy Limited (Earlier Known As Jindal Thermal Power Company Limited & Jindal Tractabel Power Company Limited) & Ors.
- M/S Texco Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. Tata Aig General Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors.
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
- M.P. Rajya Tilhan Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Maryadit, Pachama, District Sehore and Others v. M/S. Modi Transport Service
- B. L. Kashyap and Sons Ltd v. M/S Jms Steels and Power Corporation & Anr.
- Ebix Singapore Private Limited v. Committee of Creditors of Educomp Solutions Limited & Anr.
- M/S. N.N. Global Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. v. M/S. Indo Unique Flame Ltd. & Others
- Vidya Drolia and Others v. Durga Trading Corporation
- State of West Bengal & Ors. v. Calcutta Club Limited
- Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. v. Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd.
- Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Manoj Kumar & Anr.
- Rajasthan Housing Board v. New Pink City Nirman Sahkari Samiti Ltd. & Anr.