Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Legal Principle: Agreements in restraint of trade are void and unenforceable.
Fact Situation: Manu has been working as a blacksmith in his village for many decades. Somu has been undergoing training with him for the past three years. After his training is over, Somu enters into an agreement with Manu that he will not start a competing business in the same village while Manu is alive.
Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?
पर्याय
This agreement is void and unenforceable since it is a restraint on trade.
This agreement is valid and enforceable since Manu is Somu’s teacher.
This agreement is valid but not enforceable after Manu’s death.
This agreement is valid and enforceable since it is to protect Manu’s interest in consideration for teaching Somu to be a blacksmith.
Advertisements
उत्तर
This agreement is void and unenforceable since it is a restraint on trade.
Explanation:
Under section 27 of the Indian contract Act, 1872 agreements in restraint of trade are void. It stipulates that an agreement, which restrains anyone from carrying on a lawful profession, trade, or business, is void to that extent. In the given case Manu is restraining Somu to carry on a lawful profession thus the agreement between them is void. Hence option (a) is the most appropriate.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
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: A contract between the father and his son is a contract of utmost good faith. In such a type of contract law presumes that at the time of entering into the contract the father was in a position to dominate the will of his son. Where one of the parties was in the position to father was in the will of the other parties, the contract is enforceable only at the option of the party whose will was so dominated.
Facts: Ram had advanced a sum of ₹10,000 to his minor son Shyam. When Shyam became major, his father Ram misused his parental position and entered into an agreement with Shyam and obtained a bond from him for a sum of ₹30,000 in respect of the advance. Whether this agreement is enforceable?
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
LEGAL PRINCIPLE Where the parents of a minor child due to their negligence allow the child an opportunity to commit a tort, the parents are liable.
FACTUAL SITUATION The father supplied an airgun to his son who was about to turn 18 next month. After some complaints of mischief. the father took the gun away and placed it in a corner of their storeroom which was used by the family to store surplus and other unnecessary stuff. The son took it out of the store and shot A. A sued his father. Is the father liable? DECISION:
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by factual situations. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer.
Principle: A contract requires a proposal and acceptance of the proposal. It is necessary to make a binding contract, not only that the proposal is accepted, but also that the acceptance is notified to the proposer.
Factual Situation: A sent a letter to B stating that he was willing to sell to B, 10 bags of rice at Rs. 20/- each. B made a telephone call to A to inform him that he had accepted the offer. Just as he was stating his acceptance, a very noisy aircraft few over B's house. A was not able to hear the acceptance.
X, a married woman, agreed to live in adultery with B and also agreed to serve him as his housekeeper. In return, B agreed to pay X ₹500 per month for living in adultery and ₹500 per month for housekeeping. The agreement is
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?
Principle: Acceptance should be made while the offer is still subsisting. The offer or is free to retract his offer at any time before his offer gets accepted by the offeree. Once the offer is withdrawn or is lapsed, it is not open to being accepted so as to give rise to a contract. Similarly, if time is prescribed within which the offer is to be accepted, then the offer must be accepted within the prescribed time. And if no time is prescribed, then the acceptance must be made within a reasonable time. 'What is a reasonable time', is a question of fact which is to be determined by taking into account all the relevant facts and surrounding circumstances.
Facts: 'X' makes an offer to 'Y' to sell his equipment for ₹1000.00. No time is specified for acceptance. 'Y' sends his reply two years after receiving the offer.
Which of the following derivations is correct?
LEGAL PRINCIPLES: A contract is an agreement enforceable by law.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Amita invited Bina to her house for dinner. Bina accepted the invitation but later did not go. On Bina's failure to attend, Amita filed a suit against Bina for the price of non-consumed food. Will the law enforce this agreement?
DECISION:
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: An agreement is void if the court regards it as opposed to the public policy.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Sunita, while her husband Shankar was alive, promised to marry Neel in the event of Shankar's death. Subsequently, Shankar died, but Sunita refused to marry Noel. Neel sues Sunita for damages for breach of promise.
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: The acceptance must be absolute and unqualified, leaving no ground for doubt or uncertainty. If the acceptance is conditional, no valid contract is formed, and the offer can be withdrawn at any moment until the absolute acceptance has taken place within a reasonable time of such an offer.
Factual Situation: Delhi Government conducted an auction for the sale of the license of the wine shop. X offered the highest bid which was provisionally accepted "...subject to the confirmation of Chief Commissioner who may reject any bid without assigning any reasons." Since X failed to deposit the required amount, the Chief Commissioner rejected the bid. The government held X liable for the difference between the bid offered by him and the highest bid accepted in reauction and commenced proceedings for the recovery of the sum. It was contended on behalf of the government of Delhi that X was under a legal obligation to pay the difference as it was due to his default that a resale of the excise shop was ordered and hence X was liable for the deficiency in price and all expenses of such resale which was caused by his default.
Decide, giving a reason, whether X is liable to make payment to the Delhi Government.
