मराठी

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 - Mathematics

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?

पर्याय

  • 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)
  या प्रश्नात किंवा उत्तरात काही त्रुटी आहे का?
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, Chulbal 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 Dhamaj telling him that if he does not make Baalu the CEO of NIaakhan 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 Baala that he shall not enforce the employment contract. Baalu and Dhanraj are not sure as to what is to be done next.

In the above fact situation:


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.


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: Whoever takes away with him any minor less than sixteen years of age if a male, or less than eighteen years of age if a female, out of the custody of parents of such minor without the consent of such parents, is said to commit no offence.

Facts: ‘A’, a man, took away a girl below sixteen years to Mumbai without informing the parents of the girl.


.................. is forbidden by law.


A contract in which, under the terms of a contract, nothing remains to be done by either party is known as


The Law of Contract is nothing but ...............


As per section 2(e) of the Indian Contract Act, “Every Promise and every set of promise forming the consideration for each other is a/an


Acceptance takes place as against the proposer, when


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


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.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×