Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Legal Principle: An essential condition in a contract for the sale of goods is that the seller has title over the goods sold.
Fact Situation: Ranjan pays rupees two thousand and buys a watch from Mohit who runs a watch showroom and a repair shop. Jatin sees the watch with Ranjan and tells him that it is his watch and was only given to Mohit for repairs. If what Jatin says is true
Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?
पर्याय
Ranjan is now the owner of the watch since he paid rupees two thousand for it.
Ranjan is not the owner of the watch since Mohit did not have a title to it.
Mohit must pay Jatin rupees two thousand since he sold Jatin’s watch.
Mohit is the owner of the watch since he sold it to Ranjan.
Advertisements
उत्तर
Ranjan is not the owner of the watch since Mohit did not have a title to it.
Explanation:
Rules as to title: There is an implied condition on the part of the seller that, in the case of a sale, he has the right to sell the goods, and in the case of an agreement to sell, he will have the right to sell the goods when the property is to pass. Thus if the seller has no title to the goods, the buyer can reject the goods, or if he has taken possession of the goods and is deprived of it by the real owner, the buyer can recover the full price of the goods even if he has made use of them. A bought a motor-car from and used it for 4 months. B had no title to the car because he has obtained the possession by theft and consequently A had to surrender it to the real owner. A was entitled to recover from B the full price even though he used the car for 4 months. (Rowland Vs. Divall). Hence option (b) is the most appropriate. Mohit did not have title to the watch so he can not pass it to Ranjan so neither Mohit nor Ranjan is the owner of the watch.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
Legal Principle: ‘Gift' means a transfer of certain existing property made voluntarily and without consideration, by a donor, to a donee, and accepted by or on behalf of the donee during the lifetime of the donor.
Facts: Amit executed a gift deed for property ‘X’ in favour of Sooraj, who happened to be Amit’s loyal servant’s son settled in the U.S. Two months thereafter, Amit died without leaving a will regarding his assets. Amit’s children initiated steps to partition his entire property, including property ‘X’ among themselves. At that time, Sooraj came to India, and learning about the gift, claimed the property ‘X’.
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?
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
How many members are required to support the introduction of a No-Confidence Motion in the Lok Sabha?
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.
The following question consists of two statements, one labeled as ‘Assertion’ (A) and other as ‘Reason’ (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct answer.
Assertion (A): A void contract is not necessarily illegal
Reason (R): Every illegal contract is void.
Ramu applied for the post of Director in an organization. The governing body of the organization passed a resolution appointing him to the post. After the meeting, one of the members of the governing body informed him privately of the resolution. Subsequently, the resolution was rescinded. Ramu claims damages. Which one of the following is the correct legal proposition in the case?
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: Mere silence as to facts likely to affect the decision of a person to enter into a contract does not amount to fraud unless his silence is in itself equivalent to speech.
Facts: A sells to B a horse which A knows to be of unsound mind. B says to A that if A does not say anything about the state of mind of the horse, then B shall presume that the horse is of sound mind. A says nothing to B about the mental condition of the horse.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Every agreement, by which any party is restricted absolutely from enforcing his rights in respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary tribunals, is void to that extent.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Feroz and Pinto entered into an agreement for rendering certain services. As per the prevailing law, the agreement may be enforced either at Jaipur or Udaipur. The agreement itself, however, specifies that upon breach, the parties can only approach courts at Jaipur. Feroz breaches the contract and Pinto, being a resident of Udaipur. would like to sue him in Udaipur. He challenged the validity of the clause.
DECISION:
Study the following information and answer the questions that follow:
Principle: A 'fixture' is something attached to the land or a building in such a way that it is regarded as an irremovable part of the property you are considering buying. Some typical 'fixtures' in a home include the hot water service, range top, wall oven, fixed floor coverings, light fittings, and a built-in (under bench) dishwasher. Garden plants, including bushes and trees, are also 'fixtures'.
Rule A. When land is sold, all 'fixtures' on the land are also deemed to have been sold.
Rule B. If a movable thing is attached to the land or any building on the land, then it becomes a 'fixture'.
Factual Situation Khaleeda wants to sell a plot of land she owns in Beghmara (Meghalaya) and the sale value decided for the plot includes the fully-furnished palatial six-bedroom house that she has built on it five years ago. She sells it to Gurpreet for ₹60 lakh. After completing the sale, she removes the expensive Iranian carpet which used to cover the entire wooden floor of one of the bedrooms. The room had very little light and Khaleeda used this light-colored radiant carpet to negate some of the darkness in the room. Gurpreet, after moving in, realizes this and files a case to recover the carpet from Khaleeda.
Assume that in the above fact scenario, Khaleeda no longer wants the carpet. She removes the elaborately carved door to the house after the sale has been concluded and claims that Gurpreet has no claim to the door. The door in question was part of Khaleeda's ancestral home in Nagercoil (Tamil Nadu) for more than 150 years before she had it fitted as the entrance to her Beghmara house.
Amongst the following options, the most relevant consideration while deciding a case on the basis of the above two principles, would be
