Topics of Law Test 27

Result

Topics of Law Test 27

Score
-
out of -
Rank
-
out of -

TIME Taken - -

SHARING IS CARING

If our Website helped you a little, then kindly spread our voice using Social Networks. Spread our word to your readers, friends, teachers, students & all those close ones who deserve to know what you know now.

Weekly Quiz Competition

Question 1
1 / -0

This section consists of fifty $$(50)$$ questions. Each question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principles') 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 for the purposes of this section. In other words, in answering the following questions, you must not rely on any principles except the principles that are given here in 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 towards study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability even if the "most reasonable conclusion" arrived at may be unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law.
Principle: A condition precedent must be complied with before the happening of the event to which such a condition is attached. Fulfilment of such a condition after the happening of the event is no fulfillment of condition.
Facts: A transfers $$Rs. 5,000$$ 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 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 fulfillled 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

Solution

Governing principle clearly states that a condition precedent must be complied with before the happening of the event and it such condition is complied after the happening of event it will not be considered fulfillment of condition.
Same happened in the case presented before us. $$Rs. 5000/-$$ were transferred to B by A on the precondition that B will obtain permission of C, D and E for making but the obtains their consent only after marriage will not be considered valid fulfillment of condition attached.
Question 2
1 / -0

The gist of the offence of criminal conspiracy is ____________.

A
an agreement is necessary between two or more persons to do or cause to be done an illegal act.

B
a legal act by illegal means followed by an overt act to be done or cause to be done according to an agreement.

C
both (a) and (b).

D
none of the above

Solution

Section 120 of IPC, tells about the criminal conspiracy. It is an exemption to the general law where goal alone doesn't establish crime. It is expectation to commit an offence and holding hands with people having a similar goal.
Hence, A is the correct option.
Question 3
1 / -0

Legal Principle: Law does not take notice of trifles.

Factual Situation: A proposes to his neighbour B that they both should go together for a morning walk. B agrees to the proposal and it was decided that both of them would meet at a particular point at 6 a.m. from where they would set off for the morning walk. In spite of the agreement, B did not turn up. A waits for seven days. Thereafter, he files a suit against B claiming damages for the agony and mental torture suffered by him.
Decide.

A
B is guilty of contract and is liable to pay damages.

B
There is no intention to enter into legal relations.

C
The matter is too small and the court will refuse to go into it.

D
None of the above.
Question 4
1 / -0

Principle There is no liability in tort in cases of inevitable accidents.
Factual Situation A stranger takes lift in truck. The truck later meets with an accident due to break failure. The stranger suffered grievous physical injuries and nervous shock. He filed a suit to claim compensation from the truck's owner.
Decision

A
Truck owner is liable

B
Truck owner is not liable because it is an inevitable accident and defect in truck was not apparent

C
Truck owner is liable not the owner

D
Neither the truck nor the owner is liable

Solution

The truck owner is not liable in tort as facts of the case state that accident happened due to inevitable circumstances and there was no malicious intention or planning ; further an defect in the vehicle was unknown to the truck owner. So the above stated principle holds true in this case.
Option (a) and option (c) both are incorrect. Refer above explanations.
Question 5
1 / -0

A was arrested by the police for committing an offence and was subsequently granted bail by the court. One of the conditions imposed by the court for granting bail was that A arrange for a surety for Rs. 50,000. A approached B to be a surety. B agreed, but insisted that they enter into a contract whereby A would deposit Rs.50,000 into B's account, which would be returned to A by B after the case was over.

A
The contract would be void since its effect is to defeat the provisions of the Cr.P.C.

B
The contract would be void because A cannot enter into a contract when a criminal case is going on against him.

C
The contract would be void because the court is not a party to it.

D
The contract would be valid

Solution

As in the above mentioned case, there's no essential element of a valid contract that's not present. There's a consideration for both as, Rs.50,000 for B and the bailment for A. Hence, it's a valid contract.
Hence, D is the correct option.
Question 6
1 / -0

Principle Master is liable for the wrongful acts committed by his servant; provided the acts are committed during the course of employment. However, the master is not liable if the wrongful act committed by his servant has no connection, whatsoever, with the servant's contract of employment.
Facts 'D' is a driver employed by 'M' who is the owner of a company. During the lunch time, 'D' goes to close by tea shop to have a cup of tea. There he ('D') picks up fight with the tea shop owner ('T'), which resulted in some damage to his shop. 'T' wants to sue 'M' for claiming compensation for the damage caused by the fight.
Which of the following derivations is correct?

A
'M' will be liable because 'D' is his servant

B
Both 'M' and 'D' will be liable

C
'M' will not be liable because the wrongful act (picking up fight) was not committed in the course of D's employment

D
'M' will be liable albeit the wrongful act (picking up fight) was not committed in the course of D's employment

Solution

According to the principle of Vicarious Liability in Law of Torts, the master is liable for the wrongful acts committed by his servant during the course of employment.
In this case, M will not be liable because the wrongful act was not committed in the course of D's employment, as D went to have a cup of tea during the lunch time.
Question 7
1 / -0

This section consists of fifty $$(50)$$ questions. Each question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principles') 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 for the purposes of this section. In other words, in answering the following questions, you must not rely on any principles except the principles that are given here in 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 towards study of law, research aptitude and problem solving ability even if the "most reasonable conclusion" arrived at may be unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of law.
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

Solution

Option (b) is correct. M company will not be liable for damages because A had come to see the race on his own will and no body induced him to do the same.
According to the guiding principle A by agreeing to attend the race agreed to suffer any accidental harm caused in the event and thus is not allow to complain for the same.
Question 8
1 / -0

Principle: When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or irstinence, he is said to make a proposal. The expression of willingness/ desire results in a valid proposal only when it is made/ addressed to some person(s).
Facts: 'X' makes the following statement in an uninhabited hall. 'I wish to sell my mobile phone for $$Rs. 1000$$.'
Which of the following derivations is correct?

A
'X' made a statement that resulted in a promise

B
'X' made a statement that resulted in a proposal

C
'X' made a statement that did not result in any proposal

D
'X' made a statement that resulted in an agreement

Solution

Section $$2(a)$$ of the Indian contract Act states that when one person signifies to another his willingness to do or to abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence, he is said to make a proposal. In the given case, X made a statement in an uninhabited hall regarding selling his mobile phone for $$Rs. 1000$$ and it was not made or addressed to anyone. So, this does not amount to a valid proposal.
Question 9
1 / -0

Given below are a legal principle and a factual situation. Apply the given legal principle to the factual situation and select the most appropriate answer to the question given below:

Principle: Every person has a right of self-defence,if his life is under imminent threat.

Facts: Mr. Prashant threatens Mr. Krishna that he will kill Mr. Krishna. After saying so, Mr. Prashant goes to his house saying that he would get his axe.

A
Mr. Krishna will have to run away

B
Mr. Krishna will have to go to the police station and file a complaint.

C
Mr. Krishna cannot exercise the right of self-defence.

D
None of the above.

Solution

Mr. Krishna can file a complaint against him but can't exercise the action of self defence.
Section 102 of IPC, tells that when the right to private defence should be exercised. In the above mentioned case, Mr. krishna can't exercise his right as he didn't get hurt neither Mr. Prashant is in front of him with axe.
Question 10
1 / -0

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: The master/principal is liable for all acts done by his duly appointed servant/agent for all acts done by him lawfully in the course of his employment.
FACTUAL SITUATION : A,B, C and D carried on a business in partnership. While making a deal with another company, B bribed the clerk there. Is the partnership firm vicariously liable?

A
No, as bribing is not in course of employment of the partners.

B
Yes, as partners are agent of the firm.

C
Yes, as B can be said to have implied authority for the same.

D
No, as this act was not authorized by the others.

Solution

Partnership firm is vicarious liable for act of B under implied authority. But bribing cannot be considered as course of his employment.

User

Question Analysis

Correct -
Wrong -
Skipped -

My Perfomance

Score
-
out of -
Rank
-
out of -

Re-Attempt Weekly Quiz Competition

Topics of Law Test 27

Result

Topics of Law Test 27

Score

-

Rank

-

SHARING IS CARING

Question 1

B has fulfilled the condition

B has not fulfillled the condition

B was free to marry any one without the consent of any body

B must divorce his wife as he married her without fulfilling the condition

Solution

Question 2

an agreement is necessary between two or more persons to do or cause to be done an illegal act.

a legal act by illegal means followed by an overt act to be done or cause to be done according to an agreement.

both (a) and (b).

none of the above

Solution

Question 3

B is guilty of contract and is liable to pay damages.

There is no intention to enter into legal relations.

The matter is too small and the court will refuse to go into it.

None of the above.

Question 4

Truck owner is liable

Truck owner is not liable because it is an inevitable accident and defect in truck was not apparent

Truck owner is liable not the owner

Neither the truck nor the owner is liable

Solution

Question 5

The contract would be void since its effect is to defeat the provisions of the Cr.P.C.

The contract would be void because A cannot enter into a contract when a criminal case is going on against him.

The contract would be void because the court is not a party to it.

The contract would be valid

Solution

Question 6

'M' will be liable because 'D' is his servant

Both 'M' and 'D' will be liable

'M' will not be liable because the wrongful act (picking up fight) was not committed in the course of D's employment

'M' will be liable albeit the wrongful act (picking up fight) was not committed in the course of D's employment

Solution

Question 7

M company will be liable for damages because the injury was caused during the race organized by it

M company will not be liable for damages because A had come to see the race on his own will

M company will not be liable for damages because the collision between the cars was beyond its control

M company will be liable because it has earned huge revenue by way of sale of tickets for the event

Solution

Question 8

'X' made a statement that resulted in a promise

'X' made a statement that resulted in a proposal

'X' made a statement that did not result in any proposal

'X' made a statement that resulted in an agreement

Solution

Question 9

Mr. Krishna will have to run away

Mr. Krishna will have to go to the police station and file a complaint.

Mr. Krishna cannot exercise the right of self-defence.

None of the above.

Solution

Question 10

No, as bribing is not in course of employment of the partners.

Yes, as partners are agent of the firm.

Yes, as B can be said to have implied authority for the same.

No, as this act was not authorized by the others.

Solution

User

Question Analysis

My Perfomance

Score

-

Rank

-

Results Announcement on: coming Monday

Stay Tuned: We’ll update you on your result via email or SMS.