Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Principle: An agreement without free consent can be enforced only at the option of the party whose consent was not free.
Facts: A obtains the consent of B to enter into an agreement by putting a gun on the head of B‘s girlfriend.
Options
B can enforce the agreement.
B cannot enforce the agreement.
A can enforce the agreement.
Neither A nor B can enforce the agreement.
Solution 1
B can enforce the agreement.
Explanation:
For the free consent under section 14 of the Indian Contract Act, when it is not caused by
i. Coercion as under Section 15
ii. Undue influences as Section 16
iii. Fraud as defined Section 17
iv. Misrepresentation as defined Section 18
v. Mistake subject to provision of Section 20, 21 & 22
The reasonable conclusion is drawn that as the consent B is not free, B can enforce the agreement.
Solution 2
B can enforce the agreement.
Explanation:
In this case, B can enforce the contract even if the contract was given under the pressure of gunpoint, that is, there was no free will. The enforceability is based on the principle that the agreement can be enforced only at the option of the party whose consent was not free. In other words, B did not have the free will when the contract was entered into, but he has the option to enforce it, that is, B can enforce it.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
Principle: A person, who is usually mad, but occasionally not mad, may make a contract when he is not mad.
Facts: 'A‘ generally remains in the state of madness and rarely becomes capable of understanding anything.
Legal Principle: The insurer agrees to pay no more than the actual amount of the loss.
Fact Situation: Sunny insures his car worth rupees five lakh with X, an insurance company, for its value. He again insures the same car with Y, another insurance company, on the same terms. There is an accident and the car suffers a total loss. In his separate suits against X and Y, if Sunny recovers rupees five lakh from X, how much can he recover from Y?
Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?
Legal Principle: Agreements in restraint of trade are void and unenforceable.
Fact Situation: Manu has been working as a blacksmith in his village for many decades. Somu has been undergoing training with him for the past three years. After his training is over, Somu enters into an agreement with Manu that he will not start a competing business in the same village while Manu is alive.
Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?
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.
assume it is a case of undue influence. Decide whether the bank has done enough to allay concerns of undue influence?
Mark the incorrect answer
The main purpose of the Law of Contract is
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 requires a proposal and acceptance of the proposal. It is necessary to make a binding contract, not only that the proposal be accepted, but also that the acceptance is notified to the proposer.
Factual Situation:
A sent a letter to B stating that he was willing to sell to B, 10 bags of rice at ₹20/- each. B sent an e-mail to the address mentioned in the letter-head, accepting the offer.
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: A pact, other than a pact to commit suicide, to suffer any harm is not an offence, provided the age of the person who has given his consent to suffer harm is above eighteen years.
Facts: A enters into a pact with B, a boy of less than 18 years of age, to fence with each other for amusement. They agreed to suffer any harm which, in the course of such fencing, may be caused without foul play.
The following questions consist of two statements, one labelled as. 'Assertion' and the other as 'Reason'. Read both the statements carefully and answer using the codes given below.
Assertion (A): A person claims compensation for his non-gratuitous act.
Reason (R): A person who enjoys benefit from lawful, non-gratuitous acts of another must compensate him even though there is no contract.
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 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: According to the law of trade unions in India, no suit or other legal proceeding shall be maintainable in any civil court against any registered trade union or any officer or member thereof in respect of any act done in contemplation or in furtherance of a trade dispute.
Facts: Soloman, the Secretary of a registered Trade Union took a loan from a bank for the higher education of his daughter. Soon after completing the course, she was married to an NRI Engineer. Solomon did not repay the loan. The Bank demanded the payments from Soloman and warned him that the Bank will take suitable legal action against him. Identify the legal position in this regard.
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.
Facts: X, the uncle of Y, made a promise to pay him an amount of ₹1,00,000/- as a reward if Y quits smoking and drinking within one year. Y quit smoking and drinking within six months.
