Mr. SHYAM owned a motor car. He approached Mr. HARISH and offered to sell his motor car for ` 3,00,000. Mr. SHYAM told Mr. HARISH that the motor car is running at the rate of 20 KMs per litre of petrol. Both the fuel meter and the speed meter of the car were working perfectly. Mr. HARISH agreed with the proposal of Mr. SHYAM and took delivery of the car by paying ` 3,00,000/- to Mr. SHYAM. After 10 days, Mr. HARISH came back with the car and stated that the claim made by Mr. SHYAM regarding fuel efficiency was not correct and therefore there was a case of misrepresentation. Referring to the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, decide and write whether Mr. HARISH can rescind the contract on the above ground.

As per the provisions of Section 19 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, when consent to an agreement is caused by coercion, fraud or misrepresentation, the agreement is a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused. A party to contract, whose consent was caused by fraud or misrepresentation, may, if he thinks fit, insist that the contract shall be performed, and that he shall be put in the position in which he would have been if the representations made had been true. Exception: If such consent was caused by misrepresentation or by silence, fraudulent within the meaning of section 17, the contract, nevertheless, is not voidable if the party whose consent was so caused had the means of discovering the truth with ordinary diligence. In the situation given in the question, both the fuel meter and the speed meter of the car were working perfectly, Mr. HARISH had the means of discovering the truth with ordinary diligence. Therefore, the contract is not voidable. Hence, Mr. HARISH cannot rescind the contract on the above ground.