Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
The question consists of two statements, one labelled as the principle and other as Fact. You are to examine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.
Principle: When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal.
Fact: “Ramanuj telegraphed to Shyam Sunder, writing: “Will you sell me your Rolls Royce CAR? Telegram the lowest cash price.” Shyam Sunder also replied by telegram: “Lowest price for CAR is ₹20 lakh.” Ramanuj immediately sent his consent through telegram stating: “I agree to buy the CAR for ₹20 lakh asked by you.” Shyam Sunder refused to sell the car.
पर्याय
He cannot refuse to sell the CAR because the contract has already been made.
He can refuse to sell the CAR because it was only invitation to offer and not the real offer
It was not a valid offer because a willingness to enter into a contract was absent.
None of the above
Advertisements
उत्तर
He can refuse to sell the CAR because it was only an invitation to offer and not the real offer
Explanation:
When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that person to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal. In the given case. It was just an invitation to offer, not the real offer. Hence, Shyamsunder can refuse to sell the car.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
In this Question, the problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the question.
Rules
A. The act of using threats to force another person to enter into a contract is called coercion.
B. The act of using influence on another and taking undue advantage of that person is called undue influence.
C. In order to prove coercion, the existence of the use of threat, in any form and manner, is necessary. If coercion is proved, the person who has been so threatened can refuse to abide by the contract.
D. In order to prove undue-influence, there has to be a pre-existing relationship between the parties to a contract. The relationship has to be of such a nature that one is in a position to influence the other. If it is proven that there has been undue influence, the party who has been so influenced need not enforce the contract or perform his obligations under the contract.
Facts:
Aadil and Baalu are best friends. Aadil is the son of a multi-millionaire business person, Chulbul who owns Maakhan Pharmaceuticals. Baalu is the son of a bank employee, Dhanraj. One day, Aadil is abducted from his office by Baalu. Chulbul receives a phone call from Dhanraj telling him that if he does not make Baalu the CEO of Maakhan Pharmaceuticals, Aadil will be killed. Chulbul reluctantly agrees to make the Baalu the CEO.
Subsequently, Chulbul and Baalu sign an employment contract. However, as soon as Aadil is released and safely returns home, Chulbul tells Baalu that he shall not enforce the employment contract. Baalu and Dhanraj are not sure as to what is to be done next.
Baalu will succeed in getting the employment contract enforced if he can show that
Consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every 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, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of the law.
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
Principle: Every agreement, by which any party is restricted absolutely from enforcing his right in respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary Tribunals, is void to that extent. The law also provides that nobody can confer jurisdiction to a civil court by an agreement between parties.
Facts: A and B entered into a valid contract for rendering certain services. A clause in the contract was that in case of any dispute arose out of the contract; it shall be referred to for Arbitration only. Is the contract valid?
The principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option:
Principle: Every agreement, of which the object or consideration is opposed to public policy, is void. An agreement that has the tendency to injure public interest or public welfare is one against public policy. What constitutes an injury to public interest or public welfare would d epend upon the times and the circumstances.
Facts: ‘A’ promises to obtain for ‘B’ employment in the public service, and ‘B’ promises to pay rupees 5,00,000/ to ‘A’.
Consists of legal proposition(s)/ principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every 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, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of the law.
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
Principle: If a party to a contract agrees to it under the undue influence of any other party then the party under the undue influence may refuse to perform in accordance with the agreement.
Facts: A, a rich youngster became a member of a religious group and soon he was appointed by P the head of the group as his personal secretary. As per the rules of the group, all officials and staff of the group were supposed to stay in the group’s official premises itself. Some days later, A was asked by P to execute a gift deed in favour of P, in which it was mentioned that all immovable properties in his name are being gifted to P. A was unwilling to execute the deed, but he was forcefully restrained by P and his bodyguards in P’s office and made A sign the gift deed. Soon after this A left the group and refused to hand over the property as agreed to in the gift deed. Is A’s action valid?
The Indian Contract Act applies to the:
Agreement the meaning of which is uncertain is
In social agreements usual presumption is
Parol contracts are also known as
................. implies a contract though the parties never expressed their intention to enter into a contract.
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): The parties to the contract must be competent to contract otherwise it will be a void contract.
Reason (R): All wagering agreements are void.
