Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
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.
Options
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.
Advertisements
Solution
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.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
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.
Principle: A condition must be complied with after the happening of the event to which such a condition is attached.
Facts: A promises to pay Rs. 5,000 to B on the condition that he shall marry with the consent of C, D, and E. B marries without the consent of C, D, and E, but obtains their consent after the marriage.
The Contract Act came into force
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 Generally, an agreement without consideration is not valid. Therefore in order to make a valid agreement some consideration which may have some value in the eyes of law, is essentially required.
FACTS William has an old car of which he makes seldom uses. He voluntarily enters into an agreement with Smith to sell this car for rupees ten thousand. Thereafter one Anson approaches William and offers to buy that car for rupees one lac as the car was one which Anson has been searching for long. Now William wants to cancel his agreement with Smith and refuses to deliver the car to him saying that consideration (price) for the car promised by Smith is negligible and, therefore, agreement with him cannot be said to be the valid one.
Under which law a minor is incapable of entering into a contract?
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by factual situations. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer.
A sent a letter to B stating that he was willing to sell to B, 10 bags of rice at ₹20/- each. B wrote a letter to A accepting the offer and posted it.
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: When an offer is accepted by a person to whom it is made, it becomes a promise. But this promise will become legally binding only when the acceptance of the offer is unconditional.
Facts: Ram makes an offer to sell his house to Shyam for ₹50 lacs. Shyam accepts this offer but wants to pay the price of the house in five quarterly installments. Ram does not agree with it. Thereafter Shyam agrees to pay the price of the house in the way as originally desired by Ram. But Ram does not reply to it. Can Shyam compel Ram to sell his house to him?
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 hereinbelow 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: An agreement to do an act impossible in itself cannot be enforced by a court of law.
Facts: Ramesh agrees with his girlfriend Shilpa to pluck stars from the sky through his extraordinary will power, and bring them down on Earth for her within a week. After the expiry of one week, Shilpa filed a suit for damages against Ramesh for the breach of contract as Ramesh failed to perform his promise.
Principle: A contract that is duly supported by real and lawful consideration is valid not withstanding the fact that the consideration is inadequate. The quantum of consideration is for the parties to decide at the time of making a contract and not for the courts (to decide) when the contract is sought to be enforced. An agreement to which the consent of the promisor is freely given is not void merely because the consideration is inadequate, but the inadequacy of the consideration may be taken into account by the court in determining the question of whether the consent of the promisor was freely given.
Facts: 'A' agrees to sell his mobile phone worth ₹20000 for ₹100 only to ‘B’ as the content is freely given.
Which of the following derivations is correct?
LEGAL PRINCIPLES: A contract is an agreement enforceable by law.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Amita invited Bina to her house for dinner. Bina accepted the invitation but later did not go. On Bina's failure to attend, Amita filed a suit against Bina for the price of non-consumed food. Will the law enforce this agreement?
DECISION:
