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: A contract would be invalid and unlawful if the contract is for any immoral or illegal purpose.
Facts: P, was a young and helpless widow, living on the pavement. R, a neighbor gave her a house, registered in her name, on the condition that she should allow R to keep his smuggled goods and drugs in her house. After the registration was done, according to the condition in the contract, R’s agents went to keep some packets in her house, she refused. R told her the condition under which the house was given to her. She still refused. Is P justified in her action?
Options
As R was making the contract for illegal activities, P's stand is valid in law.
R can take back the house by cancelling the transfer deed.
P is not justified as she did not have the right to deny R's request.
P is right as she did not like smuggled goods to be kept in her house.
Advertisements
Solution
As R was making the contract for illegal activities, P’s stand is valid in law
Explanation:
As R was making the contract for illegal activities, P's stand is valid in law. The conditions made by R were illegal in nature. Such conditions made the contract invalid and unlawful. The contract does not stand valid in the court of law.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
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:
Financial allocation for Education was made for the first time by the Charter Act of
In agreements of a purely domestic nature, the intention of the parties to create a legal relationship is
Valid contracts
Which of the following is false with respect to minors entering a contract?
Every agreement and promise enforceable by law is ................
A contract in which, under the terms of a contract, one or both the parties have still to perform their obligations in the future is known as
“A Contract is an agreement creating and defining obligations between the parties” the definition was put forwarded by
The Law of Contract is nothing but ...............
To form a valid contract, there should be at least .............
