English

Principle: an Agreement with a Boy Below the Age of Eighteen Years is Not Enforceable by Law. Facts: a Man Entered into an Agreement with a Girl of Seventeen Years of Age. - Mathematics

Advertisements
Advertisements

Question

Principle: An agreement with a boy below the age of eighteen years is not enforceable by law.  

Facts:  A man entered into an agreement with a girl of seventeen years of age. 

Options

  • The agreement is enforceable by law. 

  • The agreement is not enforceable by law. 

  • The agreement is enforceable by the girl. 

  • No inference can be drawn. 

MCQ

Solution

No inference can be drawn. 

Explanation:

No inference can be drawn in this case because the facts (and the principle) do not provide whether the agreement with a girl of 17 can be enforced. The principle is applicable to boys of a certain age. therefore, no conclusion can be drawn. 170. (b) Since the sale of liquor is illegal, all agreements relating to the sale and purchase of liquor are void. Therefore, B cannot initiate legal proceedings against A even if A failed to meet the agreement entered into by A and B. 

shaalaa.com
Contract Law
  Is there an error in this question or solution?
2018-2019 (May) Set 1

RELATED QUESTIONS

Principle: Terms of any written contract can be proved by producing the written contract only and oral evidence is excluded.

Facts: A gives B receipt for money paid by B. Oral evidence is offered to prove payment. 


Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by factual situations. Apply the principle to the facts and select the most appropriate answer.

PRINCIPLE Every agreement by which anyone is restrained from exercising a lawful profession, trade, or business of any kind, to that extent is void.

FACTUAL SITUATION A company entered into a contract with Coca Cola Ltd. to bottle soft drinks produced by Coca Cola. One of the terms of the contract was that the company would not bottle soft drinks for any other competitor of Coca Cola during the pendency of the contract.


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 Generally, an agreement without consideration is not valid. Therefore in order to make a valid agreement some consideration which may have some value in the eyes of law, is essentially required.

FACTS William has an old car of which he makes seldom uses. He voluntarily enters into an agreement with Smith to sell this car for rupees ten thousand. Thereafter one Anson approaches William and offers to buy that car for rupees one lac as the car was one which Anson has been searching for long. Now William wants to cancel his agreement with Smith and refuses to deliver the car to him saying that consideration (price) for the car promised by Smith is negligible and, therefore, agreement with him cannot be said to be the valid one.


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: The object of an agreement is lawful unless it is forbidden by law; is of such a nature that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of any law; is fraudulent; involves or implies injury to the person or property of another person; the court regards it as immoral; it is opposed to public policy.

Factual Situation: A and B entered into a contract, whereby A agreed to get married to B if her parents paid A Rs. 1,00,000 before the wedding. B's parents failed to pay the promised amount. A sues B and her parents.


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: If the object of an agreement is or becomes unlawful or immoral or opposed to public policy in the eyes of law, then the courts will not enforce such agreements. Law generally prohibits Child labour.

Facts: P enters into an agreement with T, by which P has to let his house to T for two years and T has to pay 20,000.00 per month to P as rent. T starts a child care centre in that house. But after some time in order to earn some money for the maintenance of the centre, T starts sending the children of the centre on the rotation basis to work for four hours a day in some nearby chemical and hazardous factories. When P comes to know about this new development, he asks T either to stop the children from working in factories or to leave his house immediately. T neither agrees to leave the house nor to stop the children from working in the factories. P files a suit in the court of law of appropriate relief/action.


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 PRINCIPLE: Every partner is liable, jointly with all the other partners and also severally, for all acts of the firm done while he is a partner.

FACTUAL SITUATION: A and B started a partnership firm for providing vehicle repair services. C approached the firm for getting his car repaired and noticed that only B was present in the office. C informed the problem and B started repairing the car. While B was repairing, he filled petrol instead of oil in the engine. As a consequence, a small blast occurred and damaged the car. Now, C sued both A and B for the damage so caused. Decide. 

DECISION:


LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Nobody shall unlawfully interfere with a person’s use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it. The use or enjoyment, envisaged herein, should be normal and reasonable taking into account the surrounding situation 

FACTUAL SITUATION: Jogi and Prakash were neighbours in a residential locality. Prakash started a typing class in a part of his house and his typing sound disturbed Jogi who could not put up with any kind

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: Contract is an agreement freely entered into between the parties. But when consent to an agreement is obtained to 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 bank's 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 defense 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.

Assume it is a case of undue influence. Decide whether the bank has done enough to allay concerns of undue influence?  


Principle: Property consists of the right to possess, the right to use, the right to alienate, and the right to exclude others. The sale is complete when the property gets transferred from the seller to the buyer. 

Facts: ‘A’ sold his car to ‘B.’ B requested A to keep the car in his care on behalf B for one month. A agreed.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×