Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Legal Principle: The insurer agrees to pay no more than the actual amount of the loss.
Fact Situation: Sunny insures his car worth rupees five lakh with X, an insurance company, for its value. He again insures the same car with Y, another insurance company, on the same terms. There is an accident and the car suffers a total loss. In his separate suits against X and Y, if Sunny recovers rupees five lakh from X, how much can he recover from Y?
Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?
पर्याय
Sunny can recover rupees five lakhs from Y
Sunny cannot recover any amount from Y
Sunny must pay Y, the rupees five lakhs he received from X.
Sunny cannot insure his car with both X and Y at the same time.
Advertisements
उत्तर
Sunny cannot recover any amount from Y.
Explanation:
The principle of indemnity asserts that on the happening of a loss the insured shall be put back into the same financial position as he used to occupy immediately before the loss. In other words, the insured shall get neither more nor less than the actual amount of loss sustained. This, of course, is always subject to the limit of the sum insured. Ongoing through the case we discover that Sunny had insured his car with two insurance companies and thus getting it insured at double the price of his car. on losing it completely he cannot claim more than 5lakh of rupees according to the above-mentioned rule thus option (b) is the most appropriate statement according to which if Sunny has claimed rupees 5lakh from x company then he cannot claim any amount from y company.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित 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?
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 by 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.banks 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 defence 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?
Which one of the following conditions regarding the acquisition of citizenship by naturalization has been wrongly listed?
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: An agreement becomes a contract when it is entered into between two or more people with each other's free consent. Two or more people are said to consent when they agree to the same thing in the same sense. Consent is said to be free when it is not caused by coercion, undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation, or mistake.
Factual Situation: A went to a doctor to get himself treated. The doctor asked him to sign a "consent form" and said that unless he signs it, he will not examine him. A signed the form waiving his right to sue the doctor.
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?
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: When a person voluntarily agrees to suffer some harm, he is not allowed to complain about that.
Facts: ‘A’ was one of the spectators at a formula one car race, being held at Gurgaon, on a track owned by one’ company. During the race, there was a collision between two racing cars, one of which was thrown away amidst spectators, thereby causing an injury to ‘A’, ‘A’ claims damages for the injuries caused to him.
Principle A proposal (offer) should be made with an intention that after its valid acceptance, a legally binding promise or agreement will be created. The test for the determination of such intention is not subjective, rather it is objective. The intention of the parties is to be ascertained from the terms of the agreement and the surrounding circumstances under which such an agreement is entered into.
As a general rule, in the case of arrangements regulating social relations, it follows as a matter of course that the parties do not intend legal consequences to follow. On the contrary, as a general rule, in the case of arrangements regulating business affairs, it follows as a matter of course that the parties intend legal consequences to follow. However, the above rules are just presumptive in nature and hence can be rebutted.
Facts: One morning while having breakfast, 'X', the father, says to 'Y' (X's son), in a casual manner, 'I shall buy a motorbike for you if you get through the CLAT.'
Which of the following derivations is correct?
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:
Principle: When a future event on which a contract is dependent is the way in which a person will act at an unspecified time, then the event shall be considered to become impossible when such person does anything which renders it impossible that he should so act within any definite time, or otherwise than under further contingencies. If the event becomes impossible such agreements become void.
Factual Situation: A agrees to pay B a sum of ₹1 if B marries D in A's lifetime. D marries E and soon thereafter. A dies. Whether an agreement between A and B could be enforced if E dies within 1 year of marriage and B marries D?
Apply the legal principles to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
Legal Principles:
1. A contract comes into being from the acceptance of an offer, When the person to whom the offer is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted and the parties are at consensus and idem regarding the terms of the agreement.
2. Consideration is something that moves from the promise 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.
3. Contractual rights and liabilities are exclusive to the parties to contract.
4. There are few exceptions to the doctrine of privity of contracts like agency, trust, assignment, and third party beneficiary.
5. A quasi-contract is a contract that is created by the court when no such official contract exists between the parties to prevent a party from being unjustly enriched, or from benefitting from the situation when he/she does not deserve to do so.
Facts: Tanu’s brother, Ishan, tries to talk her into building a greenhouse in her large back-yard. She declines, but lshan is convinced that, if she were surprised by a lovely greenhouse, she would love it. Knowing that Tanu makes good money, and could easily afford the greenhouse, Ishan contacts greenhouse builder Aditya and arranges to have him erect the structure while his sister is at work one day.
Tanu is not happy with her brother’s initiative, but the deed is done. Ishan has directed Aditya to bill his sister for the greenhouse, and that turns out to be the biggest surprise for her. She declines to pay, and Ishan tells Aditya he cannot afford it. Aditya is now out, not only for payment for his many hours of hard work but cash for the materials he used. He files a civil suit to claim against both Tanu and Ishan. Decide.
