Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Principle: An agreement may be entered into orally, in writing, or by conduct.
Facts: 'A‘ went to the shop of 'B‘ and picked a toothbrush and gave a cheque of Rupees twenty to B and left the shop.
पर्याय
A entered into an agreement with B.
A did not enter into an agreement with B.
Payment of tooth brush cannot be made through a cheque.
A should have carried a currency note of Rupees twenty to make the payment.
Advertisements
उत्तर
A entered into an agreement with B.
Explanation:
The agreement is complete as evident from the writing and conduct of A. A cheque of Rs. 20 is the written form of contract (the contract is that I am paying Rs. 20 for the toothbrush). Secondly, A’s conduct of entering the shop, picking a toothbrush, and making cheque payment shows A and B have entered into a contract.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
Principle: Law never enforces an impossible promise.
Facts: 'A‘ made a promise to 'B‘ to discover treasure by magic.
The frustration of contract implies
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 Agreements, the meaning of which is not certain, or capable of being made certain, are void.
FACT A horse was bought for a certain price coupled with a promise to give ₹500 more if the horse proved lucky.
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
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: In case of a breach of contract, compensation can be awarded for the personal inconvenience suffered by a party by reason of the breach, which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach, or which the parties knew, when they made the contract to be likely to result from the breach of it.
Factual Situation: Sunita and Sushmita bought bus tickets for a journey from Adyar to Mandaveli. The bus was to go to St. Thomas Mount via Mandaveli. However, the driver mistakenly took the wrong direction and the two girls were dropped at a distance of 2Vi miles from Mandaveli on the highway. With no other transportation in sight nor a place to stay, the two had to walk 2V4 miles at midnight. Later they filed a case against the bus company and claimed 5,000 as damages for the inconvenience caused in having to walk and 6,500 for Sushmita having fallen ill by catching a cold during the night.
Decision:
Principle: Minor's agreement is void from the very beginning. It can never be validated. It cannot be enforced in the court of law.
Facts: 'A', a boy of 16 yrs of age, agree to buy a camera from 'B', who is a girl of 21 yrs of age. 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: A person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract if, at the time when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his interests.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Mr. X who is usually of sound state of mind, but occasionally of unsound state of mind, enters into a contract with Mr. Y when he was of unsound state of mind. Mr. Y having come to know about this fact afterward, wants to file a suit against Mr. X.
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: 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?
