English

Consists of Legal Proposition(S)/ Principle(S) (Hereinafter Referred to as 'Principle') and Facts. Such Principles May Or May Not Be True

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: An agreement, the terms of which are not certain, or capable of being made certain, is void.

Facts: Sunder agreed to take Bhola’s penthouse on rent for three years at the rate of rupees 12, 00, 000/­- per annum provided the house was put to thorough repairs and the living rooms were decorated according to contemporary style.

Options

  • There is no valid contract because it has vague and uncertain terms, as the term 'present style' may mean one thing to Sunder and another to Bhola.  

  • There is a valid contract because there is an offer from  Sunder and acceptance from Bhola  

  • It is a voidable contract at the option of Bhola.  

  • There is a valid contract because all the terms of the contract are certain and not vague as the rent is fixed by both of them and the term 'present style' only can be interpreted to mean the latest style.  

MCQ
Advertisements

Solution

There is no valid contract because it has vague and uncertain terms, as the term 'present style' may mean one thing to Sunder and another to Bhola.  

Explanation:

There is no valid contract because it has vague and uncertain terms, as the term 'present style' may mean one thing to Sunder and another to Bhola. The agreement did not state clearly what was contemporary style. It was a subjective and uncertain condition and could have meant differently to Sunder and Bhola. (Smt. Sohbatdei vs Deviplal And Ors AIR 1971 SC 2192, (1972) 3 SCC 495, 1971 III UJ 395 SC)

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, Chulbal 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 Dhamaj telling him that if he does not make Baalu the CEO of NIaakhan 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 Baala that he shall not enforce the employment contract. Baalu and Dhanraj are not sure as to what is to be done next.

In the above fact situation:


In this Question problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the question. In answering the following question, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than 'those stated in the problem. The aim is to test your ability to properly apply a rule to a given set of facts, even when the result is absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the aim to test any knowledge of law you may already possess.

Rule A: An owner of land has the right to use the land in any manner he or she desires. The owner of land also owns the space above and the depths below it. 

Rule B: Rights above the laud extend only to the point they are essential to any use or enjoyment of land. 

Rule C: An owner cannot claim infringement of her property right if the space above his or her land is put to reasonable use by someone else at a height at which the owner would have to reasonable use of it and it does not affect the reasonable enjoyment of his or her land.

Shazia's case: Shazia owns a single-storeyed house in Ahmedabad which has been in her family for more than 75 years. The foundation of the house cannot support another floor and Shazia has no intention of demolishing her family home to construct a bigger building. Javed and Sandeep are business partners and own three-story houses on either side of Shazia's house. Javed and Sandeep are also Ahmedabad's main distributors for a major soft drinks company. They have erected a huge hoarding advertising their products, with the ends supported on their roofs but the hoarding also passes over Shazia's house at 70 feet and casts a permanent shadow on her terrace. Shazia decides to hoist a huge Indian flag, going up to 75 feet, on her roof. She files a case, asking the court to order Javed and Sandeep to remove the hoarding for all these reasons.

Applying Rule C to Shazia's case, you would decide:


Mark the best option:
Principle: A contract the consent to which is induced by a false account or idea can be avoided by the deceived party.

Facts: Jatin approached Martin to purchase a plot of land from him. Martin was under the impression that Jatin required the land for constructing a house for himself and therefore, told Jatin that a real estate group was about to start a residential project in the vicinity of the plot; though he was himself doubtful of the same. Jatin, however, wanted to purchase the plot as he had been instructed by his elder brother to do so. Jatin entered into a contract to purchase the plot for a sum of Rupees thirty-five lacs and a few days later he came to know that the information given to him by Martin in respect of the residential project was false.

What should be Jatin do next?


Which of the following relationship raise the presumption of positive influence?


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


All Contract is a/an .................


Where a particular type of contract is required by law to be in writing and registered, it must comply with the necessary formalities as to writing, registration, and attestation. Otherwise, such a contract is


All illegal agreements are void, but all void agreements are not illegal.


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


Below question contains some basic principles and fact situations in which these basic principles have to be applied. A list of probable decisions and reasons are given.

Principles: 
1. If A is asked to do something by B, B is responsible for the act, not A.
2. If A, while acting for B commits a wrong, A is responsible for the wrong, not B.
3. If A is authorized to do something for B, but in the name of A without disclosing B's presence, both A and B may be held liable.

Facts:

Somu contracted with Amar whereunder Amar would buy a pump set to be used in Somu's farm. Such a pump set was in short supply in the market. Gulab, a dealer, had such a pump set and he refused to sell it to Amar. Amar threatened Gulab of serious consequences if he fails to part with the pump set. Gulab filed a complaint against Amar.

Proposed Decision:

(a) Amar alone is liable for the wrong though he acted for Somu.
(b) Amar is not liable for the wrong, though he is bound by the contract with Somu.
(c) Somu is bound by the contract and liable for the wrong.
(d) Both Somu and Amar are liable for the wrong.

Suggested Reasons
i) Amar committed the wrong while acting for the benefit of Somu.
ii) Amar cannot do while acting for Somu something which he cannot do while acting for himself.
iii) Both Amar and Somu are liable since they are bound by the contract.
iv) Somu has to be responsible for the act of Amar committed to Somu's benefit. Your decision with the reason.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×