Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
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: When a person who has made a promise to another person to do something does not fulfill his promise, the other person becomes entitled to receive, from the person who did not fulfill his promise, compensation in the form of money.
Facts: ‘X’ made a promise to ‘Y’ to repair his car engine. ‘Y’ made the payment for repair. After the repair, ‘Y’ went for a drive in the same car. While driving the car, ‘Y’ met with an accident due to the bursting of a tire.
विकल्प
X will be entitled to receive compensation from Y in the form of money
Y will be entitled to receive compensation from X in the form of money
X will not be entitled to receive compensation
Y will not be entitled to receive compensation from X
उत्तर १
‘Y’ will not be entitled to receive compensation from ‘X’.
Explanation:
Y' will not be entitled to receive compensation from 'X'. The promise made by 'X' to repair the car engine of the car of 'Y' and 'Y' making the payment for the same was completed. The accident of 'Y' falls outside the purview of the promise between the two and there will be no compensation involved.
उत्तर २
‘Y’ will not be entitled to receive compensation from ‘X’.
Explanation:
Y is not entitled to receive compensation from X because X made a promise to repair Y’s car engine and Y met with an accident not because of the engine problem but because of the bursting of the tyre. In other words, X fulfilled his promise, and according to the principle Y could receive compensation only when X did not fulfill the promise.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
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.
A and B enter into a contract to marry each other. Before the time fixed for the marriage, A goes mad. The contract becomes
The frustration of contract implies
A contract enforceable at the instance of one Party is known as
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 A contract cannot be enforced by or against a person who is not a party to it. However, where some benefit is conferred on the third party by the contract itself, their third party can be allowed to enforce that contract to get such benefit.
FACTS Dinesh is liable to pay ₹50000 to Suresh. In order to discharge this liability, Dinesh enters into a contract with Ramesh by which Dinesh sells his car to Ramesh for ₹1 lac. Ramesh takes the delivery of the car and promises/assures to pay its price at the earliest. Dinesh separately informs Suresh about this contract for his satisfaction. Ramesh fails to pay the car's price. Suresh wants to join Dinesh in filing suit against Ramesh for the recovery of the price of the car. Whether Suresh is entitled to do so?
In Ram v/s Shyam, Ram cannot be a
The following question consists of two statements, one labeled as ‘Assertion’ (A) and other as ‘Reason’ (R). You are to examine these two statements carefully and select the correct answer.
Assertion (A): A void contract is not necessarily illegal
Reason (R): Every illegal contract is void.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE: An agreement is void if the court regards it as opposed to the public policy.
FACTUAL SITUATION: Sunita, while her husband Shankar was alive, promised to marry Neel in the event of Shankar's death. Subsequently, Shankar died, but Sunita refused to marry Noel. Neel sues Sunita for damages for breach of promise.
DECISION:
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:
1. The battery is the intentional causation of harmful or offensive contact with another's person without that person's consent.
2. When lawfully exercising the power of arrest or some other statutory power a police officer had greater rights than an ordinary citizen to restrain another.
Factual Situation: Two police officers on duty in a police car observed two women in the street who appeared to be soliciting for the purpose of prostitution. One of the women was known to the police as a prostitute but the other, X, was not a known prostitute. When the police officers requested X to get into the car for questioning she refused to do so and instead walked away from the car. One of the officers, a policewoman, got out of the car and followed X in order to question her regarding her identity and conduct and to caution her, if she was suspected of being a prostitute, in accordance with the approved police procedure for administering cautions for suspicious behaviour before charging a woman with being a prostitute. X refused to speak to the policewoman and walked away, whereupon the policewoman took hold of X's arm to detain her. X then swore at the policewoman and scratched the officer's arm with her fingernails. X was convicted of assaulting a police officer in the execution of her duty. She appealed against the conviction, contending that when the assault occurred the officer was not exercising her power of arrest and was acting beyond the scope of her duty in detaining X by taking hold of her arm. The police contended that the officer was acting in the execution of her duty when the assault occurred because the officer had good cause to detain X for the purpose of questioning her to see whether a caution for suspicious behaviour should be administered. Decide whether the police officer is liable for battery.
Decision:
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.
