English

Which Law Introduced the System of Dyarchy in India During the British Reign?

Advertisements
Advertisements

Question

Which law introduced the system of dyarchy in India during the British reign?

Options

  • The Government of India Act,1858

  • The Government of India Act, 1909

  • The Government of India Act, 1919

  • The Government of India Act, 1935

MCQ
Advertisements

Solution

The Government of India Act, 1919

Explanation:

The Government of India Act 1858 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, Its provisions called for the liquidation of the British East India Company (who had up to this point been ruling British India under the auspices of Parliament) and the transference of its functions to the British Crown. The Government of India Act 1909 The Indian Councils Act 1909, commonly known as the Morley-Minto Reforms, was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that brought about a limited increase in the involvement of Indians in the governance of British India. The Government of India Act (1919) Dyarchy, also spelled diarchy, the system of double government introduced for the provinces of British India. Government of India Act 1935. This act ended the system of dyarchy introduced by GOI Act 1919 and provided for the establishment of a Federation of India to be made up of provinces of British India and some or all of the Princely states.

shaalaa.com
Indian Contract Act (Entrance Exams)
  Is there an error in this question or solution?
2017-2018 (May) Set 1

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. 

Rules: 
A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent, moves that property out of his or her possession is said to commit theft.
B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage. C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.

Facts:
Veena, an old lady of 78 years, used to live with her granddaughter Indira. Veena was ill and therefore bed-ridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it 'became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Indira hired a cleaner, Lucky, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that maybe there. There was a pile of old newspapers that Veena had stacked in a corner of her room. Lucky asked Indira if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes. Lucky took the pile to a municipality rubbish dump. While Lucky was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Indira probably wouldn't want this old painting back, especially because it was I’m in several places and the colour was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old, masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mounting the painting, Lucky pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear anymore. By doing so, he made its professional restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half Lucky's neighbor Kamala discovered that the painting belonged to Indira. With the motive of returning the painting to Indira, Kamala climbed through an open window into Lucky's room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house. Is Lucky guilty of criminal damage?


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: Whoever takes away with him any minor less than sixteen years of age if a male, or less than eighteen years of age if a female, out of the custody of parents of such minor without the consent of such parents, is said to commit no offence.

Facts: ‘A’, a man, took away a girl below sixteen years to Mumbai without informing the parents of the girl.


Mark the best option:
Principle: Agreements, the meaning of which is not certain, or capable of being made certain, are void.
Facts: Karthik, a physician, enters into an agreement with Talreja to rent from him a flat for setting up a clinic at Rupees fifteen thousand p.m. and Rupees two thousand p.m. extra if the flat proves lucky for him. A month after Karthik started using the flats in his clinic; he was appointed as visiting faculty by one of the medical colleges. Talreja claims Rupees seventeen thousand p.m.as rent from the next month onwards but Karthik refuses to pay him the amount claimed by him.


The agreement that is enforceable by law is known as


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


Which of the following is false with respect to minors entering a contract?


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.


A contract is made where:


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×