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: An agreement, the terms of which are not certain, or capable of being made certain, is void.
Facts: Sunder agreed to take Bhola’s penthouse on rent for three years at the rate of rupees 12, 00, 000/- per annum provided the house was put to thorough repairs and the living rooms were decorated according to contemporary style.
पर्याय
There is no valid contract because it has vague and uncertain terms, as the term 'present style' may mean one thing to Sunder and another to Bhola.
There is a valid contract because there is an offer from Sunder and acceptance from Bhola
It is a voidable contract at the option of Bhola.
There is a valid contract because all the terms of the contract are certain and not vague as the rent is fixed by both of them and the term 'present style' only can be interpreted to mean the latest style.
उत्तर
There is no valid contract because it has vague and uncertain terms, as the term 'present style' may mean one thing to Sunder and another to Bhola.
Explanation:
There is no valid contract because it has vague and uncertain terms, as the term 'present style' may mean one thing to Sunder and another to Bhola. The agreement did not state clearly what was contemporary style. It was a subjective and uncertain condition and could have meant differently to Sunder and Bhola. (Smt. Sohbatdei vs Deviplal And Ors AIR 1971 SC 2192, (1972) 3 SCC 495, 1971 III UJ 395 SC)
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
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. When land is sold, all `fixtures' on the land are also deemed to have been sold.
B. If a moveable thing is attached to the land or any building on the land, then it becomes a 'fixture'.
Facts: Khaleeda wants to sell a plot of land she owns in Baghmara, Meghalaya and the sale value decided for the plot includes the fully-furnished palatial six-bedroom house that she has built on it five years ago. She sells it to Garret for sixty laky rupees. After completing the sale, she removes the expensive Iranian carpet which used to cover the entire wooden floor of one of the bedrooms. The room had very little light and Khalid used this light-colored radiant carpet to negate some of the darkness in the room. Garret, after moving in, realizes this and files a case to recover the carpet from Khalid. Assume that in the above fact scenario, Khalid no longer wants the carpet. She removes the elaborately carved door to the house after the sale has been concluded and claims that Garret has no claim to the door. The door in question was part of Khaleeda's ancestral home in Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu for more than 150 years before she had it fitted as the entrance to her Baghmara house. As a judge, you would decide in favour of it.
The question consists of two statements, one labelled as 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.
PRINCIPLE: Mere silence as to facts likely to affect the willingness of a person to enter into a contract is not fraud unless the circumstances of the case ate such that, regard being had to them, it is the duty of the person keeping silence to speak, or unless his silence is, in itself, equivalent to speech.
FACT: A sells, by auction, to B, a horse which A knows to be unsound. A says nothing to B about the horse's unsoundness.
Which of the following is (are) included in Geographical indications of Goods
Which of the following relationship raise the presumption of positive influence?
An offer and its acceptance is the basic requirement of an agreement and as per this requirement an offer by one party
The agreement is defined by the section ............... of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.
A promises to deliver his watch to B and, in return, B Promise to pay a sum of ` 2,000. There is said to be a/ an
The offer must be ..............
Parol contracts are also known as
The speaker vote in the Lok Sabha is called
