Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Principle: A condition must have complied in order to claim the benefit of an agreement.
Facts: A agrees to transfer a farm to B, if B shall not go to England within three years after the date of the agreement, his interest in the farm shall cease. B does not go to England within the term prescribed.
विकल्प
B‘s interest in the farm continues
B‘s interest in the farm does not continue
B has a fundamental right to go to England or not to go to England and hence the condition is illegal
The agreement between A and B is void
Advertisements
उत्तर
B‘s interest in the farm does not continue
Explanation:
B’s interest in the farm does not continue because his interest shall cease is itself the part of the condition. Read the facts. Here you will find that “his interest in the farm shall cease” is a part of the successful fulfillment of the condition.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
The Contract Act came into force
A and B enter into a contract to marry each other. Before the time fixed for the marriage, A goes mad. The contract becomes
Sheela, an adult married woman, agreed to live in adultery with Rahul and also agreed to serve him as his housekeeper. In return, Rahul, an adult agreed to pay Sheela ₹ 5000 per month for living in adultery and ₹ 5000 per month for housekeeping, the agreement is
Which one of the following conditions regarding the acquisition of citizenship by naturalization has been wrongly listed?
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer.
Principle: The object of an agreement is lawful unless it is forbidden by law; is of such a nature that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of any law; is fraudulent; involves or implies injury to the person or property of another person; the court regards it as immoral; it is opposed to public policy.
Factual Situation: A was arrested by the police for committing an offence and was subsequently granted bail by the Court. One of the conditions imposed by the Court for granting bail was that A arranges for a surety for ₹50,000. A approached B to be a surety. B agreed but insisted that they enter into a contract whereby A would deposit ₹50, 000 into B's account, which would be returned to A by B after the case was over.
P, Q, and R made a joint promise to give S a sum of ₹3000. S recovered the whole amount from P. Q was declared insolvent and cannot give anything. Which statement out of the following is correct?
The question consists of legal propositions/principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion. Such principles may or may not be true in the real sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true. In other words, in answering the following question, you must not rely on any principles except the principle that is given hereinbelow for the 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.
Principle: When at the desire of one person, any other person has done or abstained from doing something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise. Only a promise coupled with consideration is enforceable by law.
Facts: X, the uncle of Y, made a promise to pay him an amount of ₹10000 as a reward, if Y quits smoking and drinking within one year X also deposited the above-mentioned amount in a bank and informed Y that the said amount will be paid to him if he quits smoking and drinking within one year. Within a period of six months of making the promise X died. After the expiry of one year of making the promise by X, Y made a request to the legal heirs of X demanding the promised money. The legal heirs of X declined the request of Y.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that person to such an act or abstinence, he is said to have made a proposal.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Ram sends a telegram to Sohan, writing: “Will you sell me your Rolls Royce car? Telegram the lowest cash price.” Sohan also replied by telegram: “Lowest price for the car is ₹20 lakh.” Ram immediately sent his consent through telegram stating: “I agree to buy the car for ₹20 lakh asked by you.” Sohan refused to sell the car.
DECISION:
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Nobody shall unlawfully interfere with a person’s use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it. The use or enjoyment, envisaged herein, should be normal and reasonable taking into account the surrounding situation
FACTUAL SITUATION: Jogi and Prakash were neighbours in a residential locality. Prakash started a typing class in a part of his house and his typing sound disturbed Jogi who could not put up with any kind
DECISION:
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
Legal Principle: Employers/Principles are vicariously liable, under the respondeat superior doctrine, for negligent acts or omissions by their employees/agents in the course of an employment agency. A servant/agent may be defined as any person employed by another to do work for him on the terms that he, the servant/agent, is to be subject to the control and directions of his employer/principal in respect of the manner in which his work is to be done.
Factual Situation: A motor car was owned by and registered and insured in the name of A (wife) but was regarded by her and her husband (B) as "our car." B used it to go to work and A for shopping at the weekends. B told A that if ever he was drunk and unfit to drive through, he would get a sober friend to drive him or else telephone her to come and fetch him. On the day in question, the husband telephoned the wife after work and told her that he was going out with friends. He visited a number of public houses and had drinks. At some stage, he realized that he was unable to drive safely and asked a friend, C, to drive. C drove them to other public houses. After the last had been visited C offered the three friends (X, Y, and Z) a lift and they got in, together with B who was in a soporific condition. C then proceeded, at his own suggestion, to drive in a direction away from the B's home to have a meal, On the way, due to C's negligent driving, an accident occurred in which both B and C were killed and the other friends got injured. X, Y, and Z brought an action against the wife both in her personal capacity and as administratrix of the husband's estate. Decide whether A is liable.
Decision:
