हिंदी

Consists of Legal Proposition(S)/ Principle(S) (Hereinafter Referred to as 'Principle') and Facts. Such Principles May Or May Not Be True in the Real and Legal Sense, Yet You Have

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Consists of legal proposition(s)/  principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every question.  
Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest in the study of law, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of the law.  
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. 

Principle: Every agreement, by which any party is restricted absolutely from enforcing his right in respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary Tribunals, is void to that extent. The law also provides that nobody can confer jurisdiction to a civil court by an agreement between parties.

Facts: A and B entered into a valid contract for rendering certain services. A clause in the contract was that in case of any dispute arose out of the contract; it shall be referred to for Arbitration only. Is the contract valid?

विकल्प

  • Arbitrator cannot be termed as an ordinary Tribunal. Hence, the agreement is void and would be unenforceable.

  • The parties were trying to confer jurisdiction to some authority to decide a dispute and hence the clause would be invalid.

  • The contract is valid but the clause regarding Arbitration is void.

  • Arbitration is also a valid dispute settlement machinery recognized by law and hence the entire contract is valid.

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

Arbitration is also a valid dispute settlement machinery recognized by law and hence the entire contract is valid.

Explanation:

Arbitration is also a valid dispute settlement machinery recognized by law and hence the entire contract is valid. Arbitration is a procedure in which a dispute is submitted, by agreement of the parties, to one or more arbitrators who make a binding decision on the dispute. The parties opt for a private dispute resolution procedure (Arbitration) instead of going to court. The contract between A and B provided that in case of a dispute, it would be resolved through an Arbitration only. The contract is valid because Arbitration is a valid dispute settlement means and sis recognized by the Indian legal system.

shaalaa.com
Indian Contract Act (Entrance Exams)
  क्या इस प्रश्न या उत्तर में कोई त्रुटि है?
2016-2017 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्न

In this Question, the problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the question.

Rules 
A. The act of using threats to force another person to enter into a contract is called coercion.
B. The act of using influence on another and taking undue advantage of that person is called undue influence.
C. In order to prove coercion, the existence of the use of threat, in any form and manner, is necessary. If coercion is proved, the person who has been so threatened can refuse to abide by the contract.
D. In order to prove undue-influence, there has to be a pre-existing relationship between the parties to a contract. The relationship has to be of such a nature that one is in a position to influence the other. If it is proven that there has been undue influence, the party who has been so influenced need not enforce the contract or perform his obligations under the contract.

Facts 
Aadil and Baalu are best friends. Aadil is the son of a multi-millionaire business person, Chulbul who owns Maakhan Pharmaceuticals.  Baalu is the son of a bank employee, Dhanraj. One day, Aadil is abducted from his office by Baalu. Chulbul receives a phone call from Dhanraj telling him that if he does not make Baalu the CEO  of Maakhan Pharmaceuticals, Aadil will be killed. Chulbul reluctantly agrees to make the Baalu the CEO.  
 Subsequently, Chulbul and Baalu sign an employment contract.  However, as soon as Aadil is released and safely returns home,  Chulbul tells Baalu that he shall not enforce the employment contract.  Baalu and Dhanraj are not sure as to what is to be done next.

Chulbul is:


In this Question problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the question. In answering the following question, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than 'those stated in the problem. The aim is to test your ability to properly apply a rule to a given set of facts, even when the result is absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the aim to test any knowledge of law you may already possess. 

Rules: 
A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent, moves that property out of his or her possession is said to commit theft.
B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage. C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.

Facts:
Veena, an old lady of 78 years, used to live with her granddaughter Indira. Veena was ill and therefore bed-ridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it 'became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Indira hired a cleaner, Lucky, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that maybe there. There was a pile of old newspapers that Veena had stacked in a corner of her room. Lucky asked Indira if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes. Lucky took the pile to a municipality rubbish dump. While Lucky was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Indira probably wouldn't want this old painting back, especially because it was I’m in several places and the colour was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old, masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mounting the painting, Lucky pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear anymore. By doing so, he made its professional restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half Lucky's neighbor Kamala discovered that the painting belonged to Indira. With the motive of returning the painting to Indira, Kamala climbed through an open window into Lucky's room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house. Is Lucky guilty of criminal damage?


In this Question problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the question. In answering the following question, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than 'those stated in the problem. The aim is to test your ability to properly apply a rule to a given set of facts, even when the result is absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the aim to test any knowledge of law you may already possess.

Rule A: An owner of land has the right to use the land in any manner he or she desires. The owner of land also owns the space above and the depths below it. 

Rule B: Rights above the laud extend only to the point they are essential to any use or enjoyment of land. 

Rule C: An owner cannot claim infringement of her property right if the space above his or her land is put to reasonable use by someone else at a height at which the owner would have to reasonable use of it and it does not affect the reasonable enjoyment of his or her land.

Shazia's case: Shazia owns a single-storeyed house in Ahmedabad which has been in her family for more than 75 years. The foundation of the house cannot support another floor and Shazia has no intention of demolishing her family home to construct a bigger building. Javed and Sandeep are business partners and own three-story houses on either side of Shazia's house. Javed and Sandeep are also Ahmedabad's main distributors for a major soft drinks company. They have erected a huge hoarding advertising their products, with the ends supported on their roofs but the hoarding also passes over Shazia's house at 70 feet and casts a permanent shadow on her terrace. Shazia decides to hoist a huge Indian flag, going up to 75 feet, on her roof. She files a case, asking the court to order Javed and Sandeep to remove the hoarding for all these reasons.

Applying Rule C to Shazia's case, you would decide:


The question consists of two statements, one labelled as principle and other as Fact. You are to exa.mine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.

PRINCIPLE: Doctrine of Double Jeopardy: No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence twice.

FACT: MaqbooI brought some gold into India witnout mal<ing any declaration to Custom department on the airport. The custom authorities confiscated the gold under the Sea Customs Act. Maqbool was later charged for having committed an offence under Foreign Exchange Regulation Act.


Choose the most appropriate option:

As per law the minimum age for the marriage of a boy and a girl in India is­-


Mark the best option:
Facts: Ganga asked Ram to send him 15 bottles of groundnut oil at once. Ram wrote back that he would send the bottles in15-20 days. Ganga did not reply and ultimately about a month and a half later Ram sent the goods. Ganga refused to accept the goods and said that there was no contract. Ram sued him in court. Will Ram succeed in his case?
Principle:

  1. In order to convert a proposal into a promise, the acceptance should be absolute and unqualified.
  2. If there is an offer and acceptance between parties a contract is formed.

Mark the best option:
Principle: Agreements, the meaning of which is not certain, or capable of being made certain, are void.
Facts: Karthik, a physician, enters into an agreement with Talreja to rent from him a flat for setting up a clinic at Rupees fifteen thousand p.m. and Rupees two thousand p.m. extra if the flat proves lucky for him. A month after Karthik started using the flats in his clinic; he was appointed as visiting faculty by one of the medical colleges. Talreja claims Rupees seventeen thousand p.m.as rent from the next month onwards but Karthik refuses to pay him the amount claimed by him.


An agreement consists of reciprocal promises between at least


A appoints B as his agent, by way of a power of attorney. This is an example of


From the four answers given, shade the appropriate answer.

A contract contravening public policy is void. There cannot be a general definition of public policy. Which of the following is a correct derivation from the above?


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×