| Re: CLAT exam question paper
154
Principle: A seller of goods cannot transfer better rights than he himself possesses in the goods sold to the
buyer.
Facts: Komal leaves his watch by mistake on a seat in the park. Sonal finds that watch and immediately
sells the same for good price to Monal who without inquiring whether Sonal is its owner or not. Komal later
on claims that watch from Monal. Decide whether Komal can succeed?
A. Komal cannot succeed as Monal has paid good price of the watch.
B. Komal cannot succeed as Monal is unaware of the fact that Sonal is not its owner.
C. Komal can not succeed as it was his carelessness and nothing else which enabled Sonal to sell the
watch to Monal.
D. Komal can not succeed as Sonal is merely finder of the watch and, therefore, cannot transfer ownership
rights thereon to Monal.
155
Principle: All citizens shall have the Fundamental Right to carry on any occupation, trade or business. But
reasonable restrictions on the exercise of such rights can be imposed by law in the interest of the general
public.
Facts: A large number of persons had been carrying on the business of dyeing and printing in Rajkot area
for the last 25 years providing employment to about 30000 families. From these business places untreated
dirty water was being discharged on the roads thereby causing damage to the public health. A notice,
therefore, was given to close this business till necessary measures to protect public health as provided
under the environmental statutes were taken by those business men.
A. Notice can not be justified as it will cause loss of employment to 30000 families.
B. Notice can not be justified as it amounts to violation of the fundamental right of the persons who have
been carrying on the business for the last 25 years.
C. The notice can not be justified on the ground of damage to public health as the persons in that area have
been voluntarily residing for long and have become used to that environment.
D. The notice can be justified as the right to business is not absolute and reasonable restriction can be
imposed by law in the interest of the public.
156.
Principle: A Contract can not be enforced by or against a person who is not a party to it. However, where
some benefit is conferred on third party by the contract itself, there third party can be allowed to enforce that
contract to get such benefit.
Facts: Dinesh is liable to pay Rs. 50000/- to Suresh. In order to discharge this liability Dinesh enters into a
contract with Ramesh by which Dinesh sells his car to Ramesh for Rs. 1 lac. Ramesh takes the delivery of
the car and promises/ assures to pay its price at the earliest. Dinesh separately informs Suresh about this
contract for his satisfaction. Ramesh fails to pay the car’s price. Suresh wants to join Dinesh in filing suit
against Ramesh for the recovery of price of the car. Whether Suresh is entitled to do so?
A. Suresh is entitled to do so because the contract was made for his benefit.
B. Suresh is entitled to do so because Dinesh is liable to him and discharge of this liability depends upon
the payment of the price of the car by Ramesh.
C. Suresh is not entitled to do so because liability of Dinesh does not depand upon any assurance of
Ramesh
D. Suresh is not entitled to do because he is not a party to the contract between Dinesh and Ramesh.
157
Principle: If a contract is made by post between two persons living in two different cities, then the contract is
said to be complete as soon as the letter of acceptance is properly posted, and the place of completion of
the contract is that city where acceptance is posted. It is worth mentioning here that in every contract there
is always an offer from one party and the acceptance of the offer from the other party.
Facts: Sani, a resident of Patna, gives an offer by post to sell his house for Rs. 25 lacs to Hani, a resident of
Allahabad. This offer letter is posted on 1st January 2013 from Patna and reaches Allahabad on 7th
January 2013. Hani accepts this offer and posts the letter of acceptance on 8th January 2013 from
Allahabad which reaches Patna on 16th January 2013. But Sani presuming that Hani is not interested in
accepting his offer, sells his house to Gani at same price on 15th of January, 2013. Hani files a suit against
Sani for the breach of contract in the competent court of Allahabad. Whether Hani will succeed?
A. Hani can not succeed as Sani can not be compelled by law to wait for the answer from Hani for an
indefinite period of time.
B. Hani can not succeed as he could use some other effective and speedy mode for communicating his
acceptance in minimum possible time
C. Hani can succeed as he properly posted the letter of acceptance and the delay was beyond his control
D. Hani can succeed as contract became complete in the eyes of law on the date of posting the letter of
acceptance
158
Principle: He, who goes to the court of law to seek justice, must come with clean hands.
Facts: P enters into a contract with S under which S has to construct a house for P and has to complete the
same within one year from the date of the contract. This contract includes two very important terms.
According to first term if there is price hike of the materials to be used in the construction, then the
escalation charges at a particular rate shall be payable by P to S. According to second term if the
construction of the house is not completed within the period prescribed for it, then S will have to pay penalty
at a particular rate to P. Before the completion of the construction work the workers of S go on strike and
strike continues up to three months even after the expiry of one year. After that period workers return and
the construction work again starts. During the last three months period of strike there was a considerable
rise in the price of the building material. S claimed escalation cost from P. P did not agree to it. S filed a suit
in the court of law either to order the payment of the price of the building material on the basis of
escalated price or to allow him to stop the work without incurring any penal liability towards P.
A. S will succeed as strike by his workers was unexpected and beyond his control.
B. S can succeed as there is an escalation clause in the contract
C. S can not succeed as he has failed to complete the construction work in time and strike can not be
treated as a valid excuse for delay in work.
D. S can succeed if he pays penalty to P for delay.
159
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
Rs. 20000.00 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 hour 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 for appropriate relief/ action
A. P can not succeed as the agreement was for the two years and it can not be terminated before the expiry
of that period
B. P can not succeed as the object at the time of making of the agreement was not clear
C. P will succeed as the object of the agreement has become unlawful.
D. P will not succeed if T agrees to share the wages of the children with P
160
Principle: whosoever by his act or omission causes environmental pollution shall be held liable for any loss
caused by such pollution. It shall be no defence in such cases that all due diligence or reasonable care was
taken while carrying out the act or omission in question.
Facts: Hari is carrying on a chemical and fertilizer industry near a bank of a river. In order to prevent and
control any kind of harm to the environment, suitable waste treatment and disposal plants were installed in
the factory. Due to some sudden mechanical/ technical problem, these plants ceased to work properly and,
therefore, caused environmental pollution, which ultimately caused substantial harm to the environment and
to the people living around the factory. Victims of such pollution file a suit for suitable remedy.
A. Victims can not succeed as necessary precautions to prevent any harm were taken by Hari.
B. Victims can not succeed as the mechanical/ technical problem was sudden and, therefore, beyond the
control of Hari.
C. Victims can succeed as it is the duty of Hari to see that no harm is caused to the environment/ people
due to his activity under any circumstances.
D. Victims could succeed if treatment/ disposal plant were not installed in the factory
161
Principle: If a person transfers movable or immovable property with its full ownership and without any
consideration to some other person, then it is called a gift.
Facts: S, who has no child of his own, makes a gift of his house worth Rs. 25 lacs to his nephew R. After
completing all the legal formalities required for a valid gift, S says to R that in case of need R will provide
that house to S for use without any questions. R does not react to it. After one year of this gift, S really
needs that house and request R to make the house available to him, but R refuses to do so.
A. R cannot refuse as he got the house without paying any consideration for that.
B. R cannot refuse as S is without children.
C. R can refuse as he has become full owner of the house.
D. R can refuse as he himself may be in need of that house.
162
Principle: An agreement to do an act impossible in itself cannot be enforced by a court of law.
Facts: Ramesh agrees with his girl friend Shilpa to pluck stars from the sky through his extraordinary will
power, and bring them down on earth for her within a week. After the expiry of one week, Shilpa filed a suit
for damages against Ramesh for the breach of contract as Ramesh failed to perform his promise.
A. Shilpa can succeed in getting damages as Ramesh has deceived her.
B. Ramesh cannot be held liable as he honestly believes that his love for Shilpa is true and, therefore, he
will succeed in his endeavour.
C. The court cannot entertain such suits as the act promised under the agreement is impossible in itself.
D. Ramesh can be held liable for making an absurd promise.
163
Principle: An agreement may be oral or written. However, if a law specifically requires that an agreement
must be in writing then the agreement must be in writing. A law specifically requires that the agreements
relating to transfer of the copyright in novel between an author of a novel and the producer of a motion
picture must be in writing.
Facts: The author of a novel, Love at Lost Sight, had several rounds of discussion with a producer
of motion picture regarding making of a motion picture based on Love at Lost Sight. During the last
discussion, they decided to make a motion picture on Love at Lost Sight. The producer made a motion
picture on Love at Lost Sight after making a payment of Rs. 10, 00,000/- (Ten Lac Only) in cash to the
author who happily accepted this amount as full and final payment. Later on, on the advice of his lawyer, the
author brought a case in a court of law against the producer on the ground that there is no written
agreement between the producer and him.
A. The author is likely to succeed in the case as the agreement is not in accordance with the law
B. The author cannot succeed in the case as he has given his consent to the agreement
C. The author is not likely to succeed in the case because he has already accepted the amount of Rs.
10,00,000/- as full an final payment
D. The author can succeed in the case as the consideration is not adequate
164
Principle: A person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract if, at the time when he
makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his
interest.
Facts: X who is usually of sound mind, but occasionally of unsound mind enters into a contract with Y when
he (X) is of unsound mind. Y came to know about this fact afterwards and now wants to file a suit against X.
A. X cannot enter into contract because he is of unsound mind when he entered into contract.
B. X can enter into contract but the burden is on the other party to prove that he was of unsound mind at the
time of contract.
C. X can enter into contract but the burden is on X to prove that he was of sound mind at the time of
contract.
D. None of these.
165
Principle: Whosoever commits any act forbidden by the Indian Penal code with a view to obtain the consent
of any person to enter into an agreement, he cannot get the agreement enforced by law but the person
whose consent has been so obtained may get the agreement enforced by law. The Indian Penal code
defines various offences and prescribes punishments therefor.
Facts: A obtains the consent of B to enter into an agreement by an act amounting to criminal intimidation
under the Indian Penal Code. A brings a case against B for performance of agreement.
A. A will succeed in the case
B. A may succeed in the case
C. B will succeed in the case
D. B will not succeed in the case
166
Principle: A contract between the father and his son is a contract of utmost good faith. In such a
type of contract law presumes that at the time of entering into the contract the father was in a position to
dominate the will of his son. Where one of the parties was in position to dominate the will of the other party,
the contract is enforceable only at the option of the party whose will was so dominated.
Facts: Ram had advanced a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to his minor son Shyam. When Shyam became major, his
father Ram misused his parental position and entered into an agreement with Shyam and obtained a bond
from him for a sum of Rs. 30,000 in respect of the advance. Whether this agreement is enforceable?
A. The agreement is enforceable against Shyam only for Rs. 10,000/-, the actual amount of money
advanced to him
B. The agreement is enforceable against Shyam for Rs. 30,000/- because he has signed the bond
C. The agreement is enforceable against Shyam because he was major at the time of agreement.
D. The agreement is not enforceable against Shyam because Ram has misused his position as father to
obtain an unfair advantage.
167
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 Rs. 10,000/- as 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.
A. The promise of X to Y is enforceable by law because Y has quitted smoking and drinking
B. The promise of X to Y is not enforceable by law because Y has benefitted by quitting smoking and
drinking
C. The promise of X to Y is enforceable by law because the amount of Rs. 10, 000/- has been deposited in
a bank
D. The promise of X to Y is enforceable by law because X has died within a period of six months of making
the promise
168
Principle: ‘Work’ means literary work, artistic work, dramatic work, musical work, cinematographic film and
sound recording but does not include acting in a cinematographic film. Only the works, as enumerated
above, can be protected under copyright law.
Facts: A very famous actor acted in a cinematographic film. The actor was also the producer and director of
cinematographic film.
A. The acting of the actor can be protected under copyright law
B. The acting of the actor can be protected under copyright law only as an artistic work
C. The acting of the actor cannot be protected under copyright law
D. The acting of the actor cannot be protected under copyright law as a cinematographic film
169
Principle: In case where the government is a party, the government shall be the first owner of the copyright
in the work unless there is an agreement to the contrary.
Facts: The Government of the State of X entered into an agreement with a retired Professor of Botany. The
Professor agreed to write a text book on Botany. The Government agreed to pay a sum of Rs. Ten Lacs to
the Professor for this work.
A. The Government of the State of X shall be first owner of copyright in the text book
B. The Professor shall be first owner of copyright in the text book
C. Both the Government of the State of X and the Professor shall be the joint owners of copyright in the text
book
D. The Professor shall be first owner of copyright in the text book only if he refuses to accept the amount of
Rs. Ten Lacs from the Government
170
Principle: Licence is an agreement whereby the owner of the copyright agrees to grant an interest in the
copyright to the licencee. Assignment is an agreement whereby the owner of the copyright transfers all the
property rights to the assignee. Property right is a bundle of rights consisting of right to possess, right to
use, right to alienate, and the right to exclude others.
Facts: A, an owner of copyright in a cinematographic film enters into an agreement with B, a film distributer.
B agrees to distribute the film only in Mumbai. A also enters into many such agreements with other
distributers for distribution of his film in other cities.
A. The agreement between A and B is more in the nature of assignment than in the nature of licence
B. The agreement between A and B is more in the nature of licence than in the nature of assignment
C. The agreement between A and B is both in the nature of assignment and licence
D. The agreement between A and B is neither in the nature of assignment nor in the nature of licence
171
Principle: Qui facit per alium facit per se, i.e. he who does things through others does it himself.
Facts: Nisha, the owner of a car, asked her friend Saurabh to take her car and drive the same to her office.
As the car was near her office, it hit a pedestrian Srikant on account of Saurabh’s negligent driving and
injured him seriously. Now Srikant files a suit for damages against Nisha.
A. Nisha is not liable as it was the negligence of Saurabh.
B. Saurabh is solely liable as Nisha was not driving the car.
C. Nisha is liable as Saurabh was driving under her authority and for her purpose.
D. Saurabh will be exempted from liability under the principle of inevitable accident.
172
Principle: Words describing quality of things cannot be registered as trade mark. However, such words may
be registered as trade mark if they acquire a secondary meaning. Words acquire secondary meaning when
people start associating the descriptive words with a person specific.
Facts: A hatchery located in Raipur is owned by ‘X’. X has been using the slogan “new laid eggs sold here”
since 1970 to describe the quality of eggs sold in his hatchery. Over a period of time because of continuous
use of this slogan, people started associating this slogan with X. X filed an application for registration of the
words “new laid eggs” as trade mark in the year 1970.
A. The words will be registered as trade mark
B. The words will not be registered as trade mark
C. The words may be registered as trade mark
D. The words may not be registered as trade mark
173.
Principle: Whoever takes away anything from the land of any person without that person’s consent is said to
commit theft. A thing so long as it is attached to the earth is not the subject of theft; but it becomes capable
of being the subject of theft as soon as it is severed from the earth.
Facts: Y cuts down a tree standing on the land of X with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of
X’s possession without the consent of X. But Y is yet to take away the tree out of X’s possession.
A. Y has committed theft as soon as he came to the land of X
B. Y has committed theft as soon as the tree has been completely cut down by him
C. Y has committed theft as soon as he has started cutting down the tree
D. Y has not committed theft because he is yet to take away the tree out of X possession
174
Principle: res ipsa loquitur i.e. the thing speaks for itself.
Facts: Seema got herself operated for the removal of her uterus in the defendant’s hospital, as there was
diagnosed to be a cyst in one of her ovaries. Due the negligence of the surgeon, who performed the
operation, abdominal pack was left in her abdomen. The same was removed by a second surgery.
A. Surgeon cannot be held responsible because it is merely a human error.
B. Surgeon can be held responsible but Seema will have to prove in the court of law that the surgeon was
grossly negligent.
C. Surgeon will be responsible and Seema need not to prove surgeon’s negligence because presence of
abdominal pack in her abdomen is sufficient proof therefor.
D. None of the above
175
Principle: Whoever takes away with him any minor person less than sixteen years of age if a male, or less
than eighteen years of age if a female out of the keeping of parents of such minor person without the
consent of such parent, is said to kidnap such minor person.
Facts: A female born on January 01, 1995 got admitted to an undergraduate program of a
reputed University on July 01, 2012. She became friendly with one of the boys, born on June 01, 1994,
of her class. The boy and the girl decided to marry. The parents of the boy agreed but the family of the girl
did not agree. On December 15, 2012 the girl made a call from her Blackberry to the boy.
The girl told the boy to come in his car at a particular place and time. The boy reached the stipulated place
before the stipulated time. He waited there for about half an hour. The girl reached the stipulated place. She
opened the door of the car and sat beside the boy who was on the driving seat. Without exchanging any
pleasantries, the boy drove the car to an unknown place.
The father of the girl lodged an FIR in the nearest police station on January 20, 2013.
A. The boy has committed the offence of kidnapping
B. The boy has not committed the offence of kidnapping
C. The boy has not committed the offence of kidnapping for there is a delay in filing the FIR
D. The boy has not committed the offence of kidnapping because the girl was his classmate
176
Principle: Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or
animal shall be punished.
Facts: Two adult men were found engaged in carnal intercourse by the police. The police arrested the men
and produced them before the Court.
A. Court will punish the police officer who arrested the men
B. Court will not punish the men for they were adults
C. Court will punish the men
D. Court may be requested to declare the law unconstitutional.
177
Principle: Wherever the causing of a certain effect, or an attempt to cause that effect, by an act or by an
omission, is an offence, it is to be understood that the causing of that effect partly by an act and partly by an
omission is the same offence.
Facts: A intentionally omitted to give food to his father. He also used to beat his father. Consequently A’s
father died.
A. A did not commit any offence
B. A committed only the offence of omitting to give food to his father
C. A committed only the offence of beating of his father
D. A committed the offence of killing of his father
178
Principle: Nothing is an offence which is done by a child under seven years of age.
Facts: A, a child born on January 01, 2005 killed another child ‘B’ on December 30, 2011.
A. A has committed no offence.
B. A has committed the offence as it is heinous crime
C. Killing of one child by another child is not an offence
D. A has not committed the offence for on the date of killing of B, A was a minor
179
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.
A. A, while playing fairly, hurts B, A commits no offence
B. A, while playing only unfairly, hurts B, A commits an offence
C. A, while playing fairly, hurts B, A commits an offence
D. A, while playing unfairly, hurts B, A commits no offence
180
Principle: When an act, which would otherwise be an offence, is not that offence by reason of the youth, the
want of maturity of understanding, the unsoundness of mind or the intoxication of the person doing that act,
every person has the same right of private defence against that act which he would have if the act were that
offence. Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.
Facts: A, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill B. B in order to save his life causes grievous hurt
to A.
A. A has committed an offence
B. A has not committed an offence
C. B has committed an offence
D. B has not committed any offence
181
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 horse, then B shall presume that the horse is of sound mind.
A says nothing to B about the mental condition of horse.
A. A has committed fraud
B. A has committed misrepresentation
C. There cannot be a fraud because A says nothing about the mental condition of the horse
D. There can not be a fraud because B did not ask A whether the horse is of sound mind
182
Principle: Whoever by words, either spoken or written brings or attempts to bring into hatred or
contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in
India shall be punished. However, comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other
action of the Government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not
constitute an offence.
Facts: A renowned professor of economics wrote a critical comment on the economic policies of the
Government of India in a National Daily. This piece of writing generated academic debate not only in the
print media but also on television and internet. A student of law asked the fellow Indians on a social
networking website to assemble at a particular place for peaceful and silent demonstration against the
said economic policies on a stipulated date and time. The crowed assembled at that venue and started
shouting anti-government slogans. Police arrested the professor.
A. The professor has committed the offence
B. The professor has not committed any offence C. The
student of law has committed the offence D. The
crowed has committed an offence
183
Principle: Where two or more persons have made a complaint for the grant of compulsory licence to the
Copyright Board, the licence shall be granted to that complainant only who, in the opinion of the Copyright
Board, would best serve the interests of the general public. Facts: Four persons made a complaint for the
grant of compulsory licence to the Copyright Board.
A. Licence shall be granted to only one complainant
B. Licence may be granted to two complainants
C. Licence may be granted to three complainants
D. Licence must be granted to all the four complainants
184.
Principle: Any police officer, not below the rank of a sub-inspector, may, if he is satisfied that an offence
in respect of the infringement of copyright in any work has been, is being, or is likely to be, committed,
seize without warrant, all copies of the work, and all plates used for the purpose of making infringing
copies of the work, wherever found, and all copies and plates so seized shall, as soon as practicable, be
produced before a Magistrate.
Facts: A Superintendent of Police (SP) conducted a raid on a shop and found pirated copies
of books. The SP formed an opinion that infringement of copyright is taking place. He arrested the
shop owner without warrant in the light of above mentioned propositions. A. The arrest of the shop
owner was within the power of the SP
B. The arrest of the shop owner was not within the power of the SP C. The
shop owner can never be arrested
D. SP was not competent to know whether infringement of copyright has taken place
185
Principle: Whoever attempts to commit an offence punishable by the Indian Penal Code and in such
attempt does any act towards the commission of the offence, shall be punished. Stealing is an offence
punishable by the Indian Penal Code.
Facts: A makes an attempt to steal some jewels by breaking open a box, and after so opening the box,
finds that there is no jewel in it.
A. A has committed no offence
B. A has committed the offence of stealing
C. A has attempted to commit the offence of stealing
D. None of the above
186
Principle: Whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible
representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or
knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is
said to defame that person.
Facts: In a community there is a custom of stealing shoes of bridegroom during the
marriage ceremony. The shoes of the bridegroom were stolen by Y. ‘A’ announced that Z has stolen the
shoes. Everyone present in the marriage party started staring at Z with great surprise. Z felt very
ashamed.
A. A defamed Z
B. A did not defame Z
C. A defamed Z for Z felt very ashamed
D. A defamed the whole marriage party
187
Principle: An employer is liable for the negligence of his employee. But an employer is not liable for the
negligence of his employee if the victim of such negligence is one of his other employees.
Facts: ‘A’ and ‘B’ were working in a factory as unskilled labourers. A was carrying a basket
of stones on his head. B was sitting on the ground. When A crossed B, all of a sudden a stone fell down
from the basket and hit B on his head. B died immediately.
A. The owner of the factory will be liable
B. A and the owner of the factory shall be jointly liable
C. The owner of the factory will not be liable
D. None of the above
188
Principle: Damages are the money recompense, as far as money can do, for the violation of a right.
Facts: A, an Indian citizen, having a right to vote, was not allowed to cast his vote on the polling booth,
by the returning officer. Name of A was mentioned in the voter’s list. A has also reported at the polling
booth in time. However, the candidate in whose favour A would have cast his vote won the election. A
filed a suit claiming damages.
A. A will be entitled to damages
B. A will not be entitled to damages
C. A will be entitled to only nominal damages
D. A will be entitled to exemplary damages
189
Principle: When a party to a contract has refused to perform, or disabled himself
from performing, his promise in its entirety, the other party may 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.
A. B must wait till June 1
B. B must have joined C on May 11
C. B is not bound to wait till June 1
D. A must pay damages to B
190
Principle: When a person voluntarily agrees to suffer some harm, he is not allowed to complain for
that.
Facts: ‘A’ was one of the spectators at a formula one car race, being held at Gurgaon, on a
track owned by one ‘M’ company. During the race, there was a collision between two racing cars, one of
which was thrown away amidst spectators, thereby causing an injury to ‘A’. ‘A’ claims damages for the
injuries caused to him.
A. M company will be liable for damages because the injury was caused during the race
organized by it
B. M company will not be liable for damages because A had come to see the race on his
own will.
C. M company will not be liable for damages because the collision between the cars was
beyond its control
D. M company will be liable because it has earned huge revenue by way of sale of tickets for the
event
191
Principle: An interest which is created on a transfer of property and depends upon the fulfillment
of a condition will fail if the fulfillment of the condition is impossible or is forbidden by law
or is of such a nature that, if permitted, it would defeat the provisions of any law or is fraudulent or
involves or implies injury to the person or property of another or the court regards it as immoral or
opposed to public policy.
Facts: A gives Rs. Ten Lacs to B on condition that B shall marry A’s daughter C. On the date
on which A gave Rs. Ten Lacs to B, C was dead.
A. B’s interest in Rs. Ten Lacs fails because of impossibility
B. B’s interest in Rs. Ten Lacs fails because of immorality
C. B’s interest in Rs. Ten Lacs fails because of prohibition by law
D. B’s interest in Rs. Ten Lacs does not fail
192
Principle: A condition precedent must be complied with before the happening of the event to which such
a condition is attached. Fulfillment of such a condition after the happening of the event is no fulfillment of
condition.
Facts: A transfers Rs. 5000 to B on condition that he shall marry with the consent of C, D and E. As C,
D and E had to go abroad for some business purposes and as the date of marriage was already fixed,
therefore, B marries without the consent of C, D and E, but obtains their consent after the marriage
when C, D and E return to their country.
A. B has fulfilled the condition
B. B has not fulfilled the condition
C. B was free to marry any one without the consent of any body
D. B must divorce his wife as he married her without fulfilling the condition
193
Principle: In an agreement, a condition subsequent must be complied with, to claim the benefit of
that agreement.
Facts: A agrees to transfer a farm to B, provided that, if B does not go to England within
three years after the date of the agreement, his interest in the farm shall cease. B does not go to England
within the term prescribed.
A. B’s interest in the farm continues
B. B’s interest in the farm does not continue
C. B has a fundamental right to go to England or not to go to England and hence the
condition was illegal
D. The agreement between A and B was void
194
Principle: Existence of all the alleged facts is relevant whether they occurred at the same time and
place or at different times and places.
Facts: A, a permanent resident in a foreign country who never visited India, is accused of waging war
against the Government of India by taking part in an armed insurrection in which property is
destroyed, troops are attacked and prisons are broken open.
A. The existence of all the above mentioned alleged facts is relevant
B. Only the alleged fact that A is accused of waging war against the Government of India is relevant
C. The fact that A was a permanent resident in a foreign country who never visited India is
not relevant
D. Only the alleged fact of taking part by A in armed resurrection is relevant
195
Principle: Whoever desires any Court to give judgment about any legal right or liability which depends
on the existence of those facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts
exist.
Facts: A asserts that B, C and D have committed an offence of criminal conspiracy and therefore A
desires a Court to give judgment that B, C and D shall be punished for that crime which A says
B, C and D have committed.
A. A must prove that B, C, and D have committed the crime
B. B, C, and D must prove that they have not committed the crime C. A must
prove that B, C, and D were present at the place of crime D. Police must
prove that B, C, and D have committed the crime
196
Principle: The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his
mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining
unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown
that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been
begotten.
Facts: X and Y married on January 15, 1995. Y, the wife of X, never left her parental home and never
went to her husband’s home. A boy was born to Y on July 15, 1995. For the Court: A. There shall be a
conclusive proof that the boy is the legitimate son of X
B. There shall be no conclusive proof that the boy is the legitimate son of X C. There
shall be a conclusive proof that the boy is the illegitimate son of X D. There shall be
no evidence at all.
197
Principle: An unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land, or some right
over, or in connection with it, is a nuisance in law of tort.
Facts: During the scarcity of onions, long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having
a license to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 Kg. of onion per ration card. The queues
extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The
neighboring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. Which one of the following
decisions will be correct in this suit?
A. The defendant is liable for nuisance
B. The defendant is not liable for nuisance
C. The defendant is liable under the principle of strict liability
D. The plaintiff’s suit should be decreed in favour of the neighbouring shopkeeper
198
Principle: Every agreement in restraint of the marriage of any person, other than a minor, is void
Facts: Qadir Khan died in a road accident. Two co-widows, Sultana and Marjina enter into an
agreement that if any of them will remarry, would forfeit her right to her share in the deceased
husband’s property.
A. The agreement is void because it was restraint of marriage
B. The agreement is not void because no restraint was imposed upon either of two widows for
remarriage.
C. The restraint was partial so agreement is valid
D. None of the above
199
Principle: Nothing is an offence merely by reason of its being done with the knowledge that it is likely to
cause harm, if it be done without any criminal intention to cause harm, and in good faith for the purpose
of preventing or avoiding other harm to a person or property. Facts: Mr. Sharman, the Italian captain of a
steam vessel, suddenly and without any fault
or negligence on his part, finds himself near the Kochi coast in such a position that before he can stop his
vessel, he must inevitably run down a boat B with twenty or thirty passengers
on board, unless he changes the course of his vessel, and that by changing his course, he must incur
risk of running down a boat C with only two passengers on board, which he may possibly clear. Whether
Sharman has committed an offence?
A. Sharman has committed no offence because this was done out of necessity
B. Sharman can be held responsible for the act of criminal negligence
C. Sharman can be held responsible for culpable homicide
D. This is a clear case of accident so Sharman cannot be held responsible
200
Principle: Only the Parliament or the State Legislatures have the authority to enact laws on their own. No
law made by State can take away a person’s fundamental right.
Facts: Parliament enacted a law, which according to a group of lawyers is violating
the fundamental rights of traders. The group of lawyers filed a writ petition against the Parliament for
enacting such law and requests the court to quash the law and to direct the Parliament to make a new
law.
A. No writ would lie against the Parliament, as the Court has no authority to direct
the Parliament to enact or re-enact a law.
B. The Court can quash the existing law if it violates fundamental right and can direct to
make a new law.
C. The Court can quash the existing law if it violates fundamental right but cannot direct the Parliament
to make a new law.
D. None of these.
|
