Which of the following leads to a voidable contract?

A contract becomes voidable when one party has the ability to reject it due to specific circumstances, and a false production claim by one party represents such a situation. In this case, if one party makes a fraudulent statement or misrepresentation about a crucial aspect of the contract—such as the characteristics or production quality of goods—it misleads the other party and undermines the foundation of the agreement. The misled party can choose to affirm the contract or void it based on the misrepresentation, making it a voidable contract.

In contrast, a mutual agreement on terms typically leads to a valid contract, as both parties have consented to the same terms. A party crafting the contract unilaterally might create a valid contract if the other party accepts the terms, but this doesn’t inherently result in a voidable contract. Finally, verbal agreements, while sometimes enforceable, are not typically classified as voidable solely based on their verbal nature; the enforceability depends on the context and details of the agreement. Thus, a false production claim directly leads to a scenario where the deceived party has the option to void the contract, highlighting the unique nature of why that situation qualifies as voidable.