Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Principle: Law never enforces an impossible promise.
Facts: 'A‘ made a promise to 'B‘ to discover treasure by magic.
पर्याय
Law will enforce the promise.
Law will not enforce the promise.
Law will enforce the promise only at the option of A.
Law will enforce the promise only at the option of B.
Advertisements
उत्तर १
Law will not enforce the promise.
Explanation:
Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act defines an agreement to do an impossible act in itself is void. The reasonable conclusion is drawn that Law will not enforce the agreement. "Law will not enforce the promise" is correct.
उत्तर २
Law will not enforce the promise.
Explanation:
Law will not enforce the promise because it is an impossible promise and the principle clearly states that Law will never enforce an impossible promise.
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?
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: MXM Co. is a building contractor who entered into an agreement with Star Heights Housing Association to refurbish a block of 27 flats. This contract was subject to a liquidated damages clause if they did not complete the contract on time. The MXM Co. engaged Hasan to do the carpentry work for an agreed price of Rs. 20,000. After six months of commencing the work, Hasan realized he had priced the job too low and would be unable to complete at the originally agreed price. He approached MXM Co. who recognized that the price was particularly low and was concerned about completing the contract on time. MXM Co. agreed to make additional payments to Hasan in return for his promise to carry out his existing obligations.
MXM Co. agreed to pay Hasan an additional f 575 per flat. Hasan continued work on the flats for a further period of 6 weeks but only received an additional f 5,000. He then ran out of money and refused to continue unless payment was made. MXM Co. engaged another carpenter to complete the contract and refused to pay Hasan any further sums. Hasan sued for payment under the original agreement and the subsequent agreement. MXM Co. argued that the agreement to make additional payments was unenforceable as Hasan has not provided any consideration to make this agreement a valid contract. Decide.
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 herein below 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 A contract cannot be enforced by or against a person who is not a party to it. However, where some benefit is conferred on the third party by the contract itself, their third party can be allowed to enforce that contract to get such benefit.
FACTS Dinesh is liable to pay ₹50000 to Suresh. In order to discharge this liability, Dinesh enters into a contract with Ramesh by which Dinesh sells his car to Ramesh for ₹1 lac. Ramesh takes the delivery of the car and promises/assures to pay its price at the earliest. Dinesh separately informs Suresh about this contract for his satisfaction. Ramesh fails to pay the car's price. Suresh wants to join Dinesh in filing suit against Ramesh for the recovery of the price of the car. Whether Suresh is entitled to do so?
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 requires a proposal and acceptance of the proposal. It is necessary to make a binding contract, not only that the proposal be accepted, but also that the acceptance is notified to the proposer.
Factual Situation:
A sent a letter to B stating that he was willing to sell to B, 10 bags of rice at ₹20/- each. B sent an e-mail to the address mentioned in the letter-head, accepting the offer.
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: Where both parties to an agreement are under a mistake as to the matter of fact essential to the agreement, the agreement is void.
Factual Situation: A had a piece of land. He believed that the value of the land was ₹1,000 per square foot. B knew that the value of the land was infact ₹1,500 per square foot. However, he did not inform A and purchased the land at ₹1,000.
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: In an agreement, a condition subsequent must be complied with, to claim the benefit of that agreement.
Facts: A agrees to transfer a farm to B, provided that, if B does not go to England within three years after the date of the agreement, his interest in the farm shall cease. B does not go to England within the term prescribed.
Principle: Caveat emptor, i.e., 'let the buyer beware' stands for the practical skill judgment of the buyer in his choice of goods for purchase. It is the business of the buyer to judge for himself that what he buys has its use and worth for him. Once bought, and if the buyer is not up to his expectations, then he alone is to blame and no one else.
Facts: For the purpose of making a uniform for the employees, 'A' bought dark blue coloured cloth from 'B' but did not disclose to the seller ('B') the specific purpose of the said purchase. When uniforms were prepared and used by the employees, the cloth was found unfit. However, the cloth was fit for a variety of other purposes (such as, making caps, boots, and carriage lining, etc)
Applying the afore-stated principle, which of the following derivations is correct as regards remedy available to 'A' in the given situation?
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?
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: An unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land or some right over or in connection with it is a nuisance in tort. The fact that the plaintiff "came to the nuisance" by knowingly acquiring property in the vicinity of the defendant's premises is not a defense to nuisance. However, an act cannot be a nuisance if it is imperatively demanded by public convenience. Thus, when the public welfare requires it, a nuisance may be permitted for special purposes.
Factual Situation: D owned and occupied an estate about two miles from RAF Wittering, an operational and training base for Harrier Jump Jets. D claimed that they suffered severe noise disturbance every time the Harrier pilots carried out training circuits: an average of 70 times a day. D alleged that the noise nuisance constituted a very serious interference with their enjoyment of their land. D instituted judicial proceedings against the defendants, the Ministry of Defence (MoD), damages amounting to Rs. 1,00,00,000.
The MoD denied liability and raised the defence that the Harrier training was undertaken for the public benefit and that they had prescriptive right over the land as D had bought their property at a time when RAF Wittering was already established so he cannot claim compensation as he already knew about the existence of RAF Wittering near his property.
Decision:
Principle: When, at the desire of one person, any other person has done or abstained from doing something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise.
Facts: X, the uncle of Y, made a promise to pay him an amount of ₹1,00,000/- as a reward if Y quits smoking and drinking within one year. Y quit smoking and drinking within six months.
