Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
This question consists of principles and facts. The principal 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 the question, you must not rely on any principle 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.
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
Principle: According to law, a person is deemed to have attained the age of majority when he completes the age of 18 years, except in the case of a person where a guardian of a minor’s person or property has been appointed under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 or where the superintendence of a minor’s property is assumed by a Court of Wards. Indian law expressly forbids a minor from entering into a contract. Hence, any contract entered into by a minor is voidabinitio regardless of whether the other party was aware of his minority or not. Further, though a minor is not competent to contract, nothing in the Contract Act prevents him from making the other party bound to the minor.
Facts: Lal executed a promissory note in favour of Gurudutt, aged 16 years stating that he would pay Gurudutt a sum of Rs. 2 Lakhs when he attains the age of majority. On attaining the age of 18, Gurudutt demanded the amount from Lal, who refused to pay. Gurudutt wants to take legal action against Lal. Identify the most appropriate legal position from the following:
विकल्प
Gurudutt should not have entered into a contract with Lal when he was a minor.
Lal was not aware of the fact that Gurudutt was a minor.
Lal argues that as per the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, Gurudutt can claim the money only after he attains the age of 21.
A promissory note duly executed in favour of a minor is not void and can be sued upon by him because he thought incompetent to contract, may yet accept a benefit.
Advertisements
उत्तर
A promissory note duly executed in favour of a minor is not void and can be sued upon by him because he thought incompetent to contract, may yet accept a benefit.
Explanation:
A promissory note duly executed in favour of a minor is not void and can be sued upon by him because he thought incompetent to contract, may yet accept a benefit. A minor by law is incompetent to contract but can accept a benefit on reaching maturity.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
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 neighbour 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. Which of the following propositions could be inferred from the facts and the rules specified,
Which of the following statements in regard to the Directive Principles of State Policy is correct?
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: Nuisance as a tort (civil wrong) means an unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it.
FACT: During the scarcity of onions, long queues "'Nt?l'e made outside the defendant's shop who has a license to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only l Kg, of onion per ration card The queues extended on to the highway and also causes some obstruction to the neighboring shops. The neighboring shopkeepers brought an action for nuisance against the defendant.
A contract is defined as an agreement enforceable by law, vide Section ____ of the Indian Contract Act.
The agreement is defined by the section ............... of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
Contractual rights and duties are created by ...............
To form a valid contract, there should be at least .............
................. implies a contract though the parties never expressed their intention to enter into a contract.
Given below is the 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: The acceptance of an offer will be valid only if it is made in the way it was expected to be made.
FACTUAL SITUATION: There was a telephonic discussion between 'J' and 'K' for negotiating the sale of the shop of former to the latter. Upon reaching an agreement as to the price of the shop of 'J' at Rs 20 lakh, 'J' told 'K' to send a letter to him within two weeks confirming that she wishes to buy the shop for the price finalized. Two days thereafter, 'K' gave her acceptance to 'J' over the telephone but sent the letter of confirmation after a lapse of one month.
ls 'J' bound by the acceptance of 'K'?
DECISION:
Below question contains some basic principles and fact situations in which these basic principles have to be applied. A list of probable decisions and reasons are given.
Principles:
1. If A is asked to do something by B, B is responsible for the act, not A.
2. If A, while acting for B commits a wrong, A is responsible for the wrong, not B.
3. If A is authorized to do something for B, but in the name of A without disclosing B's presence, both A and B may be held liable.
Facts:
Somu contracted with Amar whereunder Amar would buy a pump set to be used in Somu's farm. Such a pump set was in short supply in the market. Gulab, a dealer, had such a pump set and he refused to sell it to Amar. Amar threatened Gulab of serious consequences if he fails to part with the pump set. Gulab filed a complaint against Amar.
Proposed Decision:
(a) Amar alone is liable for the wrong though he acted for Somu.
(b) Amar is not liable for the wrong, though he is bound by the contract with Somu.
(c) Somu is bound by the contract and liable for the wrong.
(d) Both Somu and Amar are liable for the wrong.
Suggested Reasons
i) Amar committed the wrong while acting for the benefit of Somu.
ii) Amar cannot do while acting for Somu something which he cannot do while acting for himself.
iii) Both Amar and Somu are liable since they are bound by the contract.
iv) Somu has to be responsible for the act of Amar committed to Somu's benefit. Your decision with the reason.
