English

Principle: When a Party to a Contract Has Refused to Perform Or Disabled Himself from Performing His Promise in Its Entirety, the Other Party Shall Not Put an End to the Contract. - Mathematics

Advertisements
Advertisements

Question

Principle: When a party to a contract has refused to perform or disabled himself from performing his promise in its entirety, the other party shall not put an end to the contract. 

Facts: A engaged B on April 12 to enter his service on June 1, but on May 11, A wrote to B that his services would not be needed. On May 22, B joined C for employment.

Options

  • B cannot put the contract to an end.

  • B can put the contract to an end.

  • C can put his contract with B to an end.

  • A must pay damages to B.

MCQ

Solution

B cannot put the contract to an end.

Explanation:

B cannot put the contract to an end. In this case, A and B are the parties to the contract. A wrote to B that his services would not be needed. This message was conveyed after the contract was entered into. Meanwhile, B joined another employer. Since A did not fulfill the promise of the contract in its entirety, the other party, that is B cannot put an end to the contract.

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

RELATED QUESTIONS

Principle: The communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made.

Facts: 'A‘ sent a letter making a proposal to 'B‘ to purchase the house of B.  


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?


LEGAL PRINCIPLE When a contract has been broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive, from the party who has broken the contract, compensation for any loss or damage caused to him thereby, which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach. or which the parties knew, when they made the contract to be likely to result from the breach of it. Such compensation is not given for any remote or indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach. Decide, whether and to what extent B is entitled to damages in the following situation. 

FACTUAL SITUATION A contracts with B to sell him 1000 tonnes of iron at ₹ 100 per tonne. B tells A that he needs the iron for export purposes, and that he would be selling the iron at ₹ 200 per tonne. A breaks the contract. When the question comes about damages, A says he will pay only ₹ 5000 as damages because the same variety of iron was available in the market at ₹ 105 per tonne. B however contends that he should be given ₹ 100000 because that was the profit which )he would have made had A fulfilled tbe contract B had actually bought the iron at ₹ 110 and had exported it. B is


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: Mere silence as to facts likely to affect the decision of a person to enter into a contract does not amount to fraud unless his silence is in itself equivalent to speech.
Facts: A sells to B a horse which A knows to be of unsound mind. B says to A that if A does not say anything about the state of mind of the horse, then B shall presume that the horse is of sound mind. A says nothing to B about the mental condition of the horse.


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: When at the desire of the promisor, the promisee has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or abstain something, such an act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise.

FACTUAL SITUATION: A daughter promises to give maintenance to her uncle in consideration of her mother making a gift of certain properties to her. The daughter pleads a lack of consideration when the uncle seeks to enforce the contract. She says that the uncle is a stranger to the consideration and so he cannot enforce the contract. The daughter

DECISION:


Principle A proposal (offer) should be made with an intention that after its valid acceptance, a legally binding promise or agreement will be created. The test for the determination of such intention is not subjective, rather it is objective. The intention of the parties is to be ascertained from the terms of the agreement and the surrounding circumstances under which such an agreement is entered into. 
As a general rule, in the case of arrangements regulating social relations, it follows as a matter of course that the parties do not intend legal consequences to follow. On the contrary, as a general rule, in the case of arrangements regulating business affairs, it follows as a matter of course that the parties intend legal consequences to follow. However, the above rules are just presumptive in nature and hence can be rebutted.

Facts: One morning while having breakfast, 'X', the father, says to 'Y' (X's son), in a casual manner, 'I shall buy a motorbike for you if you get through the CLAT.'

Which of the following derivations is correct?


Principle: Agreements in restraint of marriage are void.

Facts: 'X' enters into an agreement, with 'Y' where under he agrees not to marry anybody else other than a person whose name starts with the letter 'A' and promises to pay 100000 to 'Y' if he ('X') breaks this agreement.

Which of the following derivations is correct?


Principle: A gift comprising both existing and the future property is void as to the latter. 
Facts: 'X' has a house that is owned by him. He contracted to purchase a plot of land adjacent to the said house, but the sale (of the plot of land) in his favour is yet to be completed. He makes a gift of both the properties (house and land) to 'Y'

Under the aforementioned circumstances, which of the following derivations is correct?


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.


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: The acceptance must be absolute and unqualified, leaving no ground for doubt or uncertainty. If the acceptance is conditional, no valid contract is formed, and the offer can be withdrawn at any moment until the absolute acceptance has taken place within a reasonable time of such an offer.
Factual Situation: Delhi Government conducted an auction for the sale of the license of the wine shop. X offered the highest bid which was provisionally accepted "...subject to the confirmation of Chief Commissioner who may reject any bid without assigning any reasons." Since X failed to deposit the required amount, the Chief Commissioner rejected the bid. The government held X liable for the difference between the bid offered by him and the highest bid accepted in reauction and commenced proceedings for the recovery of the sum. It was contended on behalf of the government of Delhi that X was under a legal obligation to pay the difference as it was due to his default that a resale of the excise shop was ordered and hence X was liable for the deficiency in price and all expenses of such resale which was caused by his default.
Decide, giving a reason, whether X is liable to make payment to the Delhi Government.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×