English

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

Advertisements
Advertisements

Question

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?

Options

  • Arbitrator cannot be termed as an ordinary Tribunal. Hence, the agreement is void and would be unenforceable.

  • The parties were trying to confer jurisdiction to some authority to decide a dispute and hence the clause would be invalid.

  • The contract is valid but the clause regarding Arbitration is void.

  • Arbitration is also a valid dispute settlement machinery recognized by law and hence the entire contract is valid.

MCQ
Advertisements

Solution

Arbitration is also a valid dispute settlement machinery recognized by law and hence the entire contract is valid.

Explanation:

Arbitration is also a valid dispute settlement machinery recognized by law and hence the entire contract is valid. Arbitration is a procedure in which a dispute is submitted, by agreement of the parties, to one or more arbitrators who make a binding decision on the dispute. The parties opt for a private dispute resolution procedure (Arbitration) instead of going to court. The contract between A and B provided that in case of a dispute, it would be resolved through an Arbitration only. The contract is valid because Arbitration is a valid dispute settlement means and sis recognized by the Indian legal system.

shaalaa.com
Indian Contract Act (Entrance Exams)
  Is there an error in this question or solution?
2016-2017 (May) Set 1

RELATED QUESTIONS

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.

Chulbul is:


The question consists of two statements, one labelled as principle and other as Fact. You are to exa.mine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.

PRINCIPLE: Mere silence as to facts likely to affect the willingness of a person to enter into a contract is not fraud unless the circumstances of the case ate such that, regard being had to them, it is the duty of the person keeping silence to speak, or unless his silence is, in itself, equivalent to speech.

FACT: A sells, by auction, to B, a horse which A knows to be unsound. A says nothing to B about the horse's unsoundness.


The Contract Act of 1872 was enacted on


The Indian Contract Act came into force on:


In agreements of a purely domestic nature, the intention of the parties to create a legal relationship is


Agreement the meaning of which is uncertain is


An implied contract is one which comes into existence on account of


To form a valid contract, there should be at least .............


................. is a one-sided contract in which only one party has to perform his promise or obligation.


Which article provides for the office of the Attorney General of India?


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×