Coercion cannot but result in chaos in the end.

Coercion cannot but result in chaos in the end - Mahatma Gandhi 

In my understanding, for a contract to be free of consent, it needs to exclude the element of coercion. Coercion is the force, pressure, metal torture put by another into you for contractual purposes. You are being coerced if, someone threatens you accordingly with to Penal Code or detains your property for contractual purposes. For a clear illustration; 

a) A is detaining wife's necklace until he wife agrees to contract

b) A threatens husband to suicide unless he agrees to a contract.

c) A threatens to detain the deceased body from performing the rituals unless B agrees to contract for any specific purposes. 

I have written in legal terms and explanation for coercion below;

There are THREE important elements under this topic which are :

1. The coercion must be the committing of an act forbidden by the Penal Code

2. The coercion must be unlawful detaining or threatening to detain any property.

3. The act of coercion must be carried out with the intention of causing any person to enter into an agreement.

Also, under Section 15 of Contract Act 1950, coercion can be committed in two ways which are the FIRST LIMB and the SECOND LIMB. For the first limb, it was held that the defendants failed to show the court any of the acts of the plaintiff is a threat to commit an act forbidden by the Penal code. The reason given was commercial pressure/economic blackmail does not amount to coercion because the agreement to the price was an exercise of free will. However, for the second limb, it is about the plaintiff’s refusal to supply the bars at the lower price amounted to unlawful detention of property in order to get the defendant to agree to the higher price but but but..... the plaintiff’s refusal DID NOT amount to unlawful detention of property. Because the plaintiff was exercising the legal right of his own property.

The interpretation between Section 15 and Section 73 of the Contract Act 1950  actually differs. It is because, under Section 73, a person to whom money has been paid by mistake or under coercion must repay or return it. 

So in case, as a Malaysian Citizen if you ever felt like you're being coerced to sign up a contractual obligation, put down the pen and RUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN....