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, of which the object or consideration is opposed to public policy, is void. An agreement that has the tendency to injure public interest or public welfare is one against public policy. What constitutes an injury to the public interest or public welfare would depend upon the times and the circumstances.
Facts: 'A' promises to obtain for 'B' employment in the public service, and 'B' promises to pay rupees 5,00,000/- to 'A'.
पर्याय
The agreement is void because rupees 5,00,000/- is excessive.
The agreement is valid, as it is with consideration for public service.
The agreement is valid, as it is a contract between two parties with their free consent.
The agreement is void, as the object and consideration for it is opposed to public policy.
Advertisements
उत्तर
The agreement is void, as the object and consideration for it are opposed to public policy.
Explanation:
The agreement is void, as the object and consideration for it are opposed to public policy. The promise made by 'A' to B is opposed to public policy as it has the tendency to injure public interest or public welfare. The agreement is, therefore, void.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
A owns a residential flat. He is entitled to a quiet possession and enjoyment of his property. This is called
Voidable contract is one
When the contract is perfectly valid but cannot be enforced because of certain technical defects. This is called
Apply the legal principles to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
Legal Principles:
1. Consideration is something that moves from the promisee to the promisor, at the implied or express request of the latter, in return for his promise. The item that moves can be a right, interest, profit, loss, responsibility given or suffered, forbearance, or a benefit which is of some value in the eyes of law.
2. An offer may be revoked at any time before the communication of its acceptance is complete as against the proposer, but not afterward.
Factual Situation: The defendant, Mr. Dhawan, wrote to the complainant, Mr. Chaman, with an offer to sell his house to him for Rs. 8,00,000. He promised that he would keep this offer open to him until Friday. However, on a Thursday Mr. Dhawan accepted an offer from a third party and sold his house. According to Mr. Chaman, he was going to accept this offer but had not said anything to Mr. Dhawan because he understood that he had time until Friday. Mr. Dhawan communicated to Mr. Chaman that the offer had been withdrawn, through a friend to the complainant. After hearing this, Mr. Chaman went to find the defendant, informing of his acceptance of the offer. Thereafter, the complainant brought an action for specific performance and breach of contract against the defendant. Whether the defendant's promise to keep the offer open until Friday morning was a binding contract between the parties and whether he was allowed to revoke this offer and sell to a third party?
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: Every person, who is of the age of majority, is competent to contract according to the law to which he is subject.
Facts: A minor mortgaged his house in favour of Thakur Das, a money lender, to secure a loan of ₹20000. A part of this, i.e. ₹10500 was actually advanced to him. While considering the proposed advance, the attorney who was acting for the money lender, received information that the plaintiff was still a minor. Subsequently the minor commenced an action stating that he was underage when he executed the mortgage and the same should, therefore, be cancelled. He prayed for setting aside the mortgage. The mortgagee money lender prayed for the refund of ₹10500 from the minor.
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?
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: In case of a breach of contract, compensation can be awarded for the personal inconvenience suffered by a party by reason of the breach, which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach, or which the parties knew, when they made the contract to be likely to result from the breach of it.
Factual Situation: Sunita and Sushmita bought bus tickets for a journey from Adyar to Mandaveli. The bus was to go to St. Thomas Mount via Mandaveli. However, the driver mistakenly took the wrong direction and the two girls were dropped at a distance of 2Vi miles from Mandaveli on the highway. With no other transportation in sight nor a place to stay, the two had to walk 2V4 miles at midnight. Later they filed a case against the bus company and claimed 5,000 as damages for the inconvenience caused in having to walk and 6,500 for Sushmita having fallen ill by catching a cold during the night.
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:
The following question consists of two statements, one labelled as. 'Assertion' and the other as 'Reason'. Read both the statements carefully and answer using the codes given below.
Assertion (A): The entries in the three legislative lists are not always set out with scientific precision.
Reason (R): The entries are not powers but are only fields of legislation.
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: Contract is an agreement freely entered into between the parties. But when consent to an agreement is obtained to undue influence, the contract is voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so obtained.
Factual Situation: The Pragya had been worked for a businessman Anurag since the age of 18, working for a range of Anurag's businesses. In 2000, (aged 21) Pragya purchased a flat. In 2005, Mr. Anurag's business was facing financial difficulties, and he asked Pragya to offer up her flat as a financial security against an overdraft facility for the business. In July of that year, the bank's solicitors wrote to Pragya, advising that she should take Independent legal advice before putting her property up as a security for the debt. The bank also notified Pragya that the guarantee was unlimited in both time and financial amount. Having discussed the arrangement with Anurag, Pragya was unaware of the extent of the borrowing but was assured that her mortgage would not be called upon and that his own properties which were also used as security would be looked at first. A charge was executed over the Pragya's property in August 2005. In 2009, Mr. Anurag's business went into liquidation and the bank formally demanded ` 60,24,912 from Pragya. Pragya raised the defense of undue influence – stating that Mr. Anurag had induced her to enter into the agreement, and the bank had full knowledge/notice of this undue influence which should set aside the bank's right to enforce the debt recovery against Pragya. The bank is contending that there is no undue influence.
Assume it is a case of undue influence. Decide whether the bank has done enough to allay concerns of undue influence?
