मराठी

Principle: Where One of the Parties to a Contract Was in the Position to Dominate the Decision of the Other Party, the Contract is Enforceable Only at the Option of the Party

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Principle: Where one of the parties to a contract was in the position to dominate the decision of the other party, the contract is enforceable only at the option of the party who was in a position to dominate the decision of the other party.

Facts: A doctor asked his patient to make a payment of 10,00,000/- (Ten Lac Only) for treatment of his fever. The patient paid an amount of 5,00,000/- (Five Lac Only) and promised to pay the remaining amount after the treatment. After treatment, the patient recovered from fever. The doctor demanded the remaining amount from the patient. The patient refused to pay.

पर्याय

  • The contract is enforceable against the doctor. 

  • The contract is enforceable against the patient. 

  • The contract is not enforceable. 

  • The contract is not enforceable against the patient.

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

The contract is enforceable against the patient. 

Explanation:

This contract is enforceable against the patient as evident from the principle, “the contract is enforceable only at the option of the party who was in a position to dominate decision of the other party.” In this case, the doctor dominated the decision of the patient. So, if the doctor wants, he can enforce the decision against the patient.

shaalaa.com
Contract Law
  या प्रश्नात किंवा उत्तरात काही त्रुटी आहे का?
2016-2017 (May) Set 1

संबंधित 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.


LEGAL PRINCIPLE When a contract has been broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive, from the party who has broken the contract, compensation for any loss or damage caused to him thereby, 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. Such compensation is not given for any remote or indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach. Decide, whether and to what extent B is entitled to damages in the following situation. 

FACTUAL SITUATION A contracts with B to sell him 1000 tonnes of iron at ₹ 100 per tonne. B tells A that he needs the iron for export purposes, and that he would be selling the iron at ₹ 200 per tonne. A breaks the contract. When the question comes about damages, A says he will pay only ₹ 5000 as damages because the same variety of iron was available in the market at ₹ 105 per tonne. B however contends that he should be given ₹ 100000 because that was the profit which )he would have made had A fulfilled tbe contract B had actually bought the iron at ₹ 110 and had exported it. B is


The frustration of contract implies 


A and B Hindu couples were married to each other. Owing to differences between them they decided to get divorced. They entered into a contract laying down the conditions that both parties had to adhere to. One of the terms of the contract was that their children would not be entitled to claim the ancestral property of A, the husband.


A contract enforceable at the instance of one Party is known as


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?


The contract is said to have three essentials. Which one among the following is not essential in the formation of a contract?


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.


LEGAL PRINCIPLES:
1. Once a person accepts another's an offer, and signifies such acceptance to the former, a contract comes into existence between them.
2. Uncertain agreements are void agreements.
3. Rejected offers can be accepted only if renewed.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Bakshi wanted to purchase a particular land. He sent a letter to his cousin. Dutt, offering him 4 lakhs for it. Dutt replied that he would not sell it below 5 lakhs. Bakshi communicated his willingness to pay this amount. Dutt did not sell the land to Bakshi. Bakshi sued him for breach of contract.
DECISION:


Principle: Property consists of the right to possess, the right to use, the right to alienate, and the right to exclude others. The sale is complete when the property gets transferred from the seller to the buyer. 

Facts: ‘A’ sold his car to ‘B.’ B requested A to keep the car in his care on behalf B for one month. A agreed.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×