Q.A is selling his horse to B. A knows the horse is lame, and deliberately distracts B's attention with unrelated talk about the horse's fine coat every time B tries to examine its legs, so that B never notices the lameness. This amounts to:
(A) No wrong at all, because mere silence about a defect is not fraud
(B) Misrepresentation only, since A never spoke a false word
(C) Fraud, because A's conduct amounts to active concealment of a fact he knew to be true, under Section 17
(D) Coercion, because A pressured B into buying the horse

Mere silence is not fraud, but deliberately steering the buyer away from discovering a known defect is active concealment.

The general rule is that mere silence about a fact affecting the other party's willingness to contract is not fraud — a seller has no general duty to volunteer every defect. But this case goes further: A does not merely stay silent, he takes active steps (deliberately distracting B) specifically to prevent B from discovering a fact A knows to be true. The Explanation to Section 17 treats such ACTIVE concealment, as opposed to passive silence, as fraud.

Option-by-option analysis:

• (A) Incorrect — this would be correct only for PASSIVE silence with no active steps to conceal; here A actively distracts B. …