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: Every agreement, of which the object or consideration is opposed to public policy, is void. An agreement that has the tendency to injure public interest or public welfare is one against public policy. What constitutes an injury to the public interest or public welfare would depend upon the times and the circumstances.
Facts: 'A' promises to obtain for 'B' employment in the public service, and 'B' promises to pay rupees 5,00,000/- to 'A'.
पर्याय
The agreement is void because rupees 5,00,000/- is excessive.
The agreement is valid, as it is with consideration for public service.
The agreement is valid, as it is a contract between two parties with their free consent.
The agreement is void, as the object and consideration for it is opposed to public policy.
उत्तर
The agreement is void, as the object and consideration for it are opposed to public policy.
Explanation:
The agreement is void, as the object and consideration for it are opposed to public policy. The promise made by 'A' to B is opposed to public policy as it has the tendency to injure public interest or public welfare. The agreement is, therefore, void.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
Legal Principle: An essential condition in a contract for the sale of goods is that the seller has title over the goods sold.
Fact Situation: Ranjan pays rupees two thousand and buys a watch from Mohit who runs a watch showroom and a repair shop. Jatin sees the watch with Ranjan and tells him that it is his watch and was only given to Mohit for repairs. If what Jatin says is true
Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?
Voidable contract is one
When the contract is perfectly valid but cannot be enforced because of certain technical defects. This is called
A and B Hindu couples were married to each other. Owing to differences between them they decided to get divorced. They entered into a contract laying down the conditions that both parties had to adhere to. One of the terms of the contract was that their children would not be entitled to claim the ancestral property of A, the husband.
'Pacta Sunt Servanda' means that
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: Where both parties to an agreement are under a mistake as to the matter of fact essential to the agreement, the agreement is void.
Factual Situation: A had a piece of land. He believed that the value of the land was ₹1,000 per square foot. B knew that the value of the land was infact ₹1,500 per square foot. However, he did not inform A and purchased the land at ₹1,000.
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 contract procured by coercion is bad under the Indian Contract Act. Coercion is defined as committing or threatening to commit any act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code. Attempt to commit suicide is an offence under the India Penal Code.
Facts: A wanted his wife B to part with some landed property given to her by her father. B resisted fearing that her husband would squander it away. A threatened her that if she does not sign the deed transferring the property to him (i.e., A), he would commit suicide. B signed the deed. Subsequently, she challenged the deed on the ground that the deed was bad under law.
Ramu applied for the post of Director in an organization. The governing body of the organization passed a resolution appointing him to the post. After the meeting, one of the members of the governing body informed him privately of the resolution. Subsequently, the resolution was rescinded. Ramu claims damages. Which one of the following is the correct legal proposition in the case?
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 at the desire of one person, any other person has done or abstained from doing something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise. Only a promise coupled with consideration is enforceable by law.
Facts: X, the uncle of Y, made a promise to pay him an amount of ₹10000 as a reward, if Y quits smoking and drinking within one year X also deposited the above-mentioned amount in a bank and informed Y that the said amount will be paid to him if he quits smoking and drinking within one year. Within a period of six months of making the promise X died. After the expiry of one year of making the promise by X, Y made a request to the legal heirs of X demanding the promised money. The legal heirs of X declined the request of Y.
Principle: When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that person to such an act or abstinence, he is said to have made a proposal.
Factual Situation: Xavier telegrammed to William, "Will you sell me your house? Telegram the lowest cash price." William also replied by Telegram "The lowest price for my house is ₹30 lakh. Xavier immediately sent his reply consenting to William's telegram by saying "I agree to buy your house for ₹30 lakh asked by you." William refused to sell his house.
Decision
