मराठी

Principle: Law Never Enforces an Impossible Promise. Facts: 'A‘ Made a Promise to 'B‘ to Discover Treasure by Magic.

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. 

MCQ
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.

shaalaa.com

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.

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

संबंधित प्रश्‍न

Principle: A condition must be complied with after the happening of the event to which such a condition is attached.

Facts:  A promises to pay Rs. 5,000 to B on the condition that he shall marry with the consent of C, D, and E. B marries without the consent of C, D, and E, but obtains their consent after the marriage. 


The Contract Act came into force


LEGAL PRINCIPLE Where the parents of a minor child due to their negligence allow the child an opportunity to commit a tort, the parents are liable.

FACTUAL SITUATION The father supplied an airgun to his son who was about to turn 18 next month. After some complaints of mischief. the father took the gun away and placed it in a corner of their storeroom which was used by the family to store surplus and other unnecessary stuff. The son took it out of the store and shot A. A sued his father. Is the father liable? DECISION


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: A contract requires a proposal and acceptance of the proposal. It is necessary to make a binding contract, not only that the proposal is 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 wrote a letter to A accepting the offer and posted it.


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 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. Only a promise coupled with consideration is enforceable by law.

Facts: X, the uncle of Y, made a promise to pay him an amount of 10000 as a reward, if Y quits smoking and drinking within one year X also deposited the above-mentioned amount in a bank and informed Y that the said amount will be paid to him if he quits smoking and drinking within one year. Within a period of six months of making the promise X died. After the expiry of one year of making the promise by X, Y made a request to the legal heirs of X demanding the promised money. The legal heirs of X declined the request of Y.  


Principle: The consideration or object of an agreement is unlawful if it is forbidden by law. Every agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful is void. 

Facts: 'X' promises to pay 'Y' 50000, if he ('Y') commits a crime, 'X' further promises to indemnify him ('Y') against any liability arising thereof. 'Y' agrees to act as per X's promise. 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: 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.

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 given below and select the most appropriate answer. 

Legal Principle:
1. The battery is the intentional causation of harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
2. When lawfully exercising the power of arrest or some other statutory power a police officer had greater rights than an ordinary citizen to restrain another.
Factual Situation: Two police officers on duty in a police car observed two women in the street who appeared to be soliciting for the purpose of prostitution. One of the women was known to the police as a prostitute but the other, X, was not a known prostitute. When the police officers requested X to get into the car for questioning she refused to do so and instead walked away from the car. One of the officers, a policewoman, got out of the car and followed X in order to question her regarding her identity and conduct and to caution her, if she was suspected of being a prostitute, in accordance with the approved police procedure for administering cautions for suspicious behaviour before charging a woman with being a prostitute. X refused to speak to the policewoman and walked away, whereupon the policewoman took hold of X's arm to detain her. X then swore at the policewoman and scratched the officer's arm with her fingernails. X was convicted of assaulting a police officer in the execution of her duty. She appealed against the conviction, contending that when the assault occurred the officer was not exercising her power of arrest and was acting beyond the scope of her duty in detaining X by taking hold of her arm. The police contended that the officer was acting in the execution of her duty when the assault occurred because the officer had good cause to detain X for the purpose of questioning her to see whether a caution for suspicious behaviour should be administered. Decide whether the police officer is liable for battery. 

Decision:


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: Goodtyre is a tyre manufacturer who agreed with their dealer to not sell the tyres below a recommended retail price (RRP). As part of the agreement, Goodtyre also required their dealers to gain the same agreement with their retailers, who in this instance was Bestmotors. The agreement held that if tyres were sold below the RRP, they would be required to pay 500 per tyre in damages to Good tyre. This was agreed between the dealer and Bestmotors, which effectively made Goodtyre a third party to that agreement. Sometime after this, Bestmotor sold the tyres below the agreed price and Goodtyre sued for damages and an injunction to prevent them from continuing this activity. Bestmotors is arguing that Goodtyre could not enforce the contract as it was not part of the contract between the dealer and Bestmotors. The court decided that Goodtyre had no right to access damages. Which of the following is the correct reasons?

I. The good tyre could not claim for damages as only a  party to a contract can claim damages under it.  

II. The good tyre had not given any consideration to  Bestmotors and therefore there could be no binding contract between the parties.  

III. The good tyre was not listed as an agent within the contract and could therefore not be included as a  valid third-party who had rights to claim on the contract. 


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×