Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
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: A person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract if, at the time, when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his interest.
Facts: X, who is usually of sound mind but occasionally of unsound mind enters into a contract with Y when he (X) is of unsound mind. Y came to know about this fact afterward and now wants to file a suit against X.
Options
X cannot enter into a contract because he is of unsound mind when he entered into a contract
X can enter into a contract but the burden is on the other party to prove that he was of unsound mind at the time of contract
X can either into a contract but the burden is on X to prove that he was of sound mind at the time of contract
None of the above
Advertisements
Solution
X cannot enter into a contract because he is of unsound mind when he entered into a contract
Explanation:
According to the principle, a person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract, if he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment, in this case, X is usually of sound mind but occasionally of unsound mind enters into a contract with Y when he (X) is of unsound mind. So, according to the principle X is not competent to enter into a contract with Y, because of unsoundness of mind.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
The question consists of two statements, one labelled as a 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.
PRINCIPAL: ignorantia juris nonexcusat and ingnorantia facit excusat
FACT: George was a passenger from Zurich to Manila in a Swiss Plane. When the plane landed at the airport at Etombay on 28th Nov. 1962 it was found on search that George carried 34 kgs of gold bars in person and that he had not declared it in the 'Manifest for transfer. On 28th Nov. 1962 Govemment of India issued a notification and modified its earlier exemption and now it is necessary that the gold must be declared in the "Manifest" of the aircraft.
What is a moot'?
Legal phrase is followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option:
‘Punctum Temporis’ means:
Legal phrase is followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option:
Faux pas
Mark the best option:
Who is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act?
Mark the best option:
Caveat emptor means –
In ‘quid-pro-quo’, quo stands for
The Indian Patents & Design Act enacted in
As per the Payment of Wages Act, if the employment of any employee is terminated his pending wages must be paid in ______ working days from the date of termination
Local self-governance is an example of
