मराठी

Principle: a Person, Who is Usually Mad, but Occasionally Not Mad, May Make a Contract When He is Not Mad. Facts: 'A‘ Generally Remains in the State of Madness and Rarely - Mathematics

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Principle: A person, who is usually mad, but occasionally not mad, may make a contract when he is not mad.  

Facts:  'A‘ generally remains in the state of madness and rarely becomes capable of understanding anything.

पर्याय

  • A can make a contract. 

  • A can never make a contract. 

  • A can make a contract at any time whenever he pleases. 

  • A can make a contract only for his own benefit.  

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

A can make a contract.

Explanation:

A can make the contract is evident from the principle that a person can make a contract when he is not mad. In this case on rare occasions when A is not mad, he can make a contract.

shaalaa.com
Contract Law
  या प्रश्नात किंवा उत्तरात काही त्रुटी आहे का?
2018-2019 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्‍न

Legal Principle: A characteristic feature of partnerships is the principle of mutual agency, i.e., every partner is an agent for every other partner and will hence be able to bind them by his act, within the business of the partnership.

Fact Situation: Ram and Shyam are partners of M/s R & S Trading Company which trades in rice varieties. Ram agrees to purchase ten tons of rice from Govind. Ram dies after the rice is delivered to the premises of M/s R & S Trading Company but before the payment of the price is made. Is the agreement binding on Shyam?

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?


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: A second suit will not be heard on the same facts between the same parties.

Nakshatra files a suit against Chandra for getting possession of a house on the ground that the property passed on to her through the will executed by Surya before his death. The suit gets dismissed as Nakshatra fails to produce the will. Nakshatra files another suit against Chandra to get the same house from the latter, on the ground that she was entitled to the house as being the nearest heir of Surya.


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: When there is a breach of contract, the resulting damages will have to be paid by the party breaching the contract to the aggrieved party. However, the parties are free to agree as to damages payable in advance in case there is a breach of contract.

Facts: Mr. Ramesh entered into a contract with Mr. Ramakrishna for selling his green Alto Car for Rs. 3 lakhs. Mr. Ramakrishna was to pay Rs. 3 lakhs on or before 25th April 2005 and take possession of the car. The party failing to honour the contract has to pay Rs. 40,000/- as damages to the other party. Mr. Ramakrishna has not performed his part of the contract. Mr. Ramesh is claiming Rs. 40,000/-


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: A contract procured by coercion is bad under the Indian Contract Act. Coercion is defined as committing or threatening to commit any act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code. Attempt to commit suicide is an offence under the India Penal Code.

Facts: A wanted his wife B to part with some landed property given to her by her father. B resisted fearing that her husband would squander it away. A threatened her that if she does not sign the deed transferring the property to him (i.e., A), he would commit suicide. B signed the deed. Subsequently, she challenged the deed on the ground that the deed was bad under law.


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


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: An agreement to do an act impossible in itself cannot be enforced by a court of law.

Facts: Ramesh agrees with his girlfriend Shilpa to pluck stars from the sky through his extraordinary will power, and bring them down on Earth for her within a week. After the expiry of one week, Shilpa filed a suit for damages against Ramesh for the breach of contract as Ramesh failed to perform his promise.


Principle: The transferor of goods cannot pass a better title than what he himself possesses.

Facts: 'X' sells a stolen bike to 'Y' 'Y' buys it in good faith. As regards the title to bike, 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): Custom to have the force of law must be followed from time immemorial.
Reason (R): Custom represents the common consciousness of the people.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×