Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Principle: Mere silence as to facts likely to affect the decision of a person to enter into a contract is not a fraud.
Facts: A sells to B (A‘s daughter who is a minor) a horse which A knows to be unsound. A says nothing to B about the unsoundness of the horse.
विकल्प
A has committed fraud
A has committed no fraud
There cannot be a contract between a father and daughter
The daughter did not ask therefore the father did not tell, hence no fraud
उत्तर
A has committed no fraud
Explanation:
A has not committed fraud because A is merely silent as to the facts likely to affect the decision of a person to enter into a contract. In this case, A is silent about the fact of unsoundness of his horse which he sells to his daughter. Hence no fraud has been committed.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
The contract is said to have three essentials. Which one among the following is not essential in the formation of a contract?
LEGAL PRINCIPLE A minor is not competent to contract.
FACTUAL SITUATION Deep, a 9th standard student realises that he is a minor, he is not permitted by law to execute a contract, appoints on Mandeep as his agent to conclude the purchase of land to gift it to his mother on her birthday. Mandeep accordingly prepares the papers for the transaction but at the last minute, the seller who had agreed to sell it now refuses to sell it contending that he does not wish to sell the land to a minor. Deep seeks to enforce the contract against the seller.
Under which law a minor is incapable of entering into a contract?
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE Contract is an agreement freely entered into between the parties. But when consent to an agreement is obtained by undue influence, the contract is voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so obtained.
FACTUAL SITUATION The Pragya had been worked for a businessman Anurag since the age of 18, working for a range of Anurag's businesses. In 2000, (aged 21) Pragya purchased a flat. In 2005, Mr Anurag's business was facing financial difficulties, and he asked Pragya to offer up her flat as a financial security against an overdraft facility for the business. In July of that year, the.banks solicitors wrote to Pragya, advising that she should take independent legal advice before putting her property up as a security for the debt. The bank also notified Pragya that the guarantee was unlimited in both time and financial amount. Having discussed the arrangement with Anurag, Pragya was unaware of the extent of the borrowing but was assured that her mortgage would not be called upon and that his own properties which were also used as security would be looked at first. A charge was executed over the Pragya's property in August 2005. In 2009, Mr Anurag's business went into liquidation and the bank formally demanded ₹ 60 24,912 from Pragya. Pragya raised the defence of undue Influence - stating that Mr Anurag had induced her to enter into the agreement, and the bank had full knowledge/notice of this undue influence which should set aside the bank's right to enforce the debt recovery against Pragya. The bank is contending that there is no undue influence.
Whether the consent to offer the flat as financial security obtained through undue influence?
Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer.
Principle: A contingent contract is a contract to do or not to do something, if some event, collateral to such contract, does or does not happen.
Facts: A agrees to pay B a sum of Rs. 1 lakh if B marries C within a period of six months. B marries C during the seventh month as the marriage hall was available only during that month. B claims Rs. 1 lakh from A.
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.
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: When a party to a contract has refused to perform or disabled himself from performing, his promise in its entirety, the other party may put an end to the contract.
Facts: A engaged B on April 12 to enter his service on June 1, but on May 11, A wrote to B that his services would not be needed. On May 22, B joined C for employment.
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: When a person voluntarily agrees to suffer some harm, he is not allowed to complain about that.
Facts: ‘A’ was one of the spectators at a formula one car race, being held at Gurgaon, on a track owned by one’ company. During the race, there was a collision between two racing cars, one of which was thrown away amidst spectators, thereby causing an injury to ‘A’, ‘A’ claims damages for the injuries caused to him.
Principle: Caveat emptor, i.e., 'let the buyer beware' stands for the practical skill judgment of the buyer in his choice of goods for purchase. It is the business of the buyer to judge for himself that what he buys has its use and worth for him. Once bought, and if the buyer is not up to his expectations, then he alone is to blame and no one else.
Facts: For the purpose of making a uniform for the employees, 'A' bought dark blue coloured cloth from 'B' but did not disclose to the seller ('B') the specific purpose of the said purchase. When uniforms were prepared and used by the employees, the cloth was found unfit. However, the cloth was fit for a variety of other purposes (such as, making caps, boots, and carriage lining, etc)
Applying the afore-stated principle, which of the following derivations is correct as regards remedy available to 'A' in the given situation?
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:
