Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Legal Principle: An agreement entered into by way of a wager/bet is unenforceable in law.
Fact Situation: Thomas is very good at predicting the outcomes of cricket matches. Raja and Hoja give him rupees thousand each to enable him to bet with others about the outcome of a cricket match. Thomas wins rupees three lakh after betting three thousand rupees.
Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?
पर्याय
Thomas must share rupees three lakh with Raja and Hoja equally.
Thomas must return rupees thousand each to Raja and Hoja.
Thomas need not share the three lakh with Raja and Hoja since it is the outcome of an unenforceable agreement.
If Thomas does not pay them rupees two lakh each, Raja and Hoja can sue him to recover their share.
Advertisements
उत्तर
Thomas need not share the three lakh with Raja and Hoja since it is the outcome of an unenforceable agreement.
Explanation:
Effects of wagering agreement-According to the section 30 of contract act, "agreements by way of wager are void; and no suit shall be brought for recovering anything alleged to be won on any wager, or entrusted to any person to abide the result of any game or other uncertain event on which any wager is made". Thus in the case presented before us, there is no agreement and even If there was an agreement, it was by way of wager, so it is void under section 30 of the contract act. Hence option (c) is the most appropriate and Thomas is not required to share his winnings with Raja and Hoja as there was no enforceable agreement between them.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
'Pacta Sunt Servanda' means that
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 a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: The occupier of premises owes a duty of care to all his invites and visitors.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Laloo was running a dairy from his house. People used a part of his farm as a short cut to get to a nearby railway station. Laloo who did not approve of this, put up a notice that "Trespassers will be prosecuted". However, since a number of these people were also his customers he tolerated them. One day, a person who was using this short cut was attacked by a bull belonging to the farm. The injured person filed a suit against him.
DECISION:
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: When the parties to an agreement agree on the same thing in the same sense, there arises legally binding obligations between them.
Facts: Zaverilals antique shop was a well-known shop in the locality. Taradevi, a socialite of the locality, went to the shop and she was attracted by an earthen jar on display. Zaverilal explained to her that the jar belonged to the Hoysaia period; and despite its earthern composition, it was very strong and almost unbreakable. Taradevi replied to him that she was so captivated by the jar that it was immaterial to her as to which period, it belonged. She bought the jar and came home. She placed the jar in a prominent place in her drawing-room. One of her friends, an art critique, who happened to visit her, told her that the jar was not at all an Antique, but Taradevi did not bother about it. One day, it accidentally fell down and broke into pieces. Taradevi took up the matter with Zaverilal that his both statements were wrong and therefore, he should pay damages to her
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: Proposal (communication) + Acceptance (communication) + Consideration = Contract. The communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made.
Facts: X’s nephew absconded from home. He sent his servant in search of the boy. After the servant had left, X by handbills offered to pay ₹501 to anybody finding his nephew. The servant came to know of this offer only after he had already traced the missing child. He, therefore, brought an action to recover the reward.
Principle: The consideration or object of an agreement is unlawful if it is forbidden by law. Every agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful is void.
Facts: 'X' promises to pay 'Y' ₹50000, if he ('Y') commits a crime, 'X' further promises to indemnify him ('Y') against any liability arising thereof. 'Y' agrees to act as per X's promise. Which of the following derivations is correct?
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): No action lies for more damage caused by some act that does not violate a legal right.
Reason (R): An action lies for interference with another's legal right even where it causes no actual damage.
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): Custom to have the force of law must be followed from time immemorial.
Reason (R): Custom represents the common consciousness of the people.
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.
Whether the consent to offer the flat as financial security obtained through undue influence?
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:
1. Negligence is the absence of care on the part of one party which results in some damage to the other Party.
2. Generally, a person is under no duty to control another to prevent his doing damage to a third party.
3. The foreseeability test basically asks whether the person causing the injury should have reasonably foreseen the general consequences that would result because of his or her conduct.
4. Statutory authority implies that an act is done by a person to fulfill his duty imposed by the State. Statutory authority is a valid defence under the law of torts.
Factual Situation: Ten borstal trainees were working on an island in a harbour in the custody and under the control of three officers. During the night, seven of them escaped. It was claimed that at the time of the escape the officer's lad retired to bed. The seven got on board a yacht, moored off the island and set it in motion. They collided with another yacht, the property of X and damaged it. X sued the Home office for the amount of the damage. Decide whether, on the facts pleaded in the statement of claim the Home Office, its servants or agents owed any duty of care to X capable of giving rise to a liability in damages with respect to the detention of persons undergoing sentences of borstal training or with respect to the manner in which such persons were treated, employed, disciplined, controlled or supervised whilst undergoing such sentences.
Decision:
