Topics of Law Test 62

Result

Topics of Law Test 62

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

An agreement enforceable by law is a _______.

A
Promise

B
Contract

C
Obligation

D
Lawful Promise
Question 2
1 / -0

Choose the correct answers from the following alternatives given
Mr. X invited all his close friends for a dinner on the occasion of the successful completion of his research. He wanted to take good care of his friends and accordingly be arranged a very lavish dinner in a star hotel. On the day, to his shock and surprise the friends could not turn up to the dinner, consequently all the dishes and money were wasted. He was terribly disappointed. In the above situation which of the following remedies is/are available to Mr. X for the los caused to him?

A
Mr. X can file a suit against his friends for not attending to the dinner

B
Mr. X cannot have any remedy

C
Mr. X can recover the expenses incurred for the arrangements from his friends

D
Mr. X can file a suit for the special damages
Question 3
1 / -0

PRINCIPLE: Law does not take notice of trifles.

FACTS: A proposes to his neighbour B that they both should go together for a morning walk. B agrees to the proposal and it is 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. Inspite of the agreement, B does not turn up. A waits for him at 6 A.M everyday for a continuous period of seven days. Thereafter he files a suit against B claiming damages for the agony and metal torture suffered by him.
DECIDE.

A
B is guilty of breach of contract and is liable to pay damage.

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.

Solution

De minimis is a latin expression meaning "about minimal things", normally in the locutions de minimis non curat praetor which means that the praetor does not concern himself with trifles or de minimis non curat lex which means that the law does not concern itself with trifles. It is a legal doctrine by which the court refuses to consider trifling matters.
Hence, in the above situation, the matter is too trivial.
Question 4
1 / -0

A promise to subscribe to a charity is a ___________.

A
valid contract

B
voidable contract

C
void agreement

D
void contract
Question 5
1 / -0

A proposal when accepted becomes a ________________.

A
promise

B
contract

C
offer

D
acceptance
Question 6
1 / -0

Choose the correct answer from the alternatives given.
Ordinarily, a minors agreement is ____________.

A
Void ab initio

B
Voidable

C
Valid

D
Unlawful

Solution

Void ab initio.
It signifies that that void from very beginning. An agreement not enforceable by law is to be a void. Thus, an agreement with a minor is void. A void agreement never sums to an agreement.
A void agreement is legitimate when it is gone into, yet consequent to its arrangement something happens which makes its unenforceable by law.
Question 7
1 / -0

Choose the correct answers from the following alternatives given
Sanju took a medical insurance from Deadly Diseases Insurance & Claim Corporation of Asia (DDICCA) through one of Its agent, Manju. Sanju singed whatever documents were placed before her by Manju in good faith. The documents contained the fact that Sanju was healthy, fit and fine whereas she was actually suffering from chronic asthma and acute allergy. Sanju did not take care to suggest the changes in the documents and the policy was issued based on the above submissions.

A
Sanju is well protected because she relied on Manju in all good faith.

B
Sapju is well, protected because Manju never specifically. asked here. about the above issues and so she remained silent.

C
Sanju has a duty to speak and disclose the above issues.

D
Sanju has no duty to speak and disclose the above issues It is the duty of DDICCA and its representatives to ask whatever is required
Question 8
1 / -0

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A violation of a legal right of someone, whether results in a legal injury or not, gives rise to an action in tort for compensation. At the same time, an action by someone, which results in some loss or damage to somebody else is not actionable, if there is no violation of a right of that somebody.
FACTUAL SITUATION: ABC Coaching Centre was a poplular CLAT coaching academy with several good trainers. A lot of aspirants used to attend its coaching classes from all over and was making good profit. During a session, T, one of the very good and popular trainers of ABC, had some difference of opinion with the owner of ABC and left the coaching centre. In August 2016, T started another Entrance Coaching Centre closer to ABC which resulted in a substantial drop in its students and huge financial loss. The owner of ABC wants to file a case against T for the loss sustained by ABC. What do you think is the right legal position?

A
T will be liable to compensate the loss to ABC.

B
T started the new coaching centre near ABC intentionally, and shall be liable to compensate the loss of ABC.

C
T should have consulted ABC before starting his coaching centre.

D
T has not violated any of ABC's legal right though they sustained some financial loss, and not legally bound to compensate ABC.

Solution

Injuria sine damnum means injury of legal rights without damage. It basically states that infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage.
The maxim 'Damnum sine injuria' means that "no action will lie if there is actual loss or damage but there has been no infringement of legal right". Where there has been no infringement of any legal right, the mere fact of harm or loss will not render such act or omission actionable although the loss may be substantial or even irreparable. This maxim has been propounded in the above mentioned case law as T had not violated any of ABC's legal rights.
Question 9
1 / -0

PINCIPLE: When a criminal act is done by one person in furtherance of the common intention of himself and some other persons, each of such person is liable for the act in the same manner as it it were done by each one of them.
FACTUAL SITUATION: A, B and C decided to commit burglary. They broke into a locked house. However, before they had finished their work, a domestic servant appeared from the out-house and started shouting. A, B and C left the house and started running away. They were pursued by a small crowd. A, on being caught by X, one of the persons pursuing them, stabbed him and ran away. By the time B and C had disappeared. X died on account of the stab wounds. Later, the police arrested all the three. They were charged for attempted burglary and murder of X.

A
Along with A, the person who stabbed X, B and C are also guilty of murder because A stabbed X in furtherance of common intention

B
Along with A, B and C are also guilty of murder because A, at the time of stabbing X, was acting on behalf of B and C and he wanted to save not only himself but B and C aw well

C
A alone is guilty of murder because though there was common intention to commit the offence of burglary, there was no common intention to commit the offence of murder

D
None of the above

Solution

The ingredients or essentials of the principle are-

‘Criminal Act is done by several persons'- the criminal act done by any person must be some act similar or in pursuance of the common intention and must concert with the acts of others. Several persons show that there should be at least 2 people involved

'In furtherance of common intention’- Common intention\means unity of purpose or a pre-planned plan. For common intention, there must be a meeting of minds to do an act.
A,B and C decided and had the common intention to commit burglary but not to murder X. Therefore A alone is guilty of murder of X.
Question 10
1 / -0

Choose the correct answers from the following alternatives given
If there is a unilateral mistake as regards identity of a party caused by fraud of the other party, the contract is __________.

A
void

B
voidable

C
illegal

D
none of the above

User

Question Analysis

Correct -
Wrong -
Skipped -

My Perfomance

Score
-
out of -
Rank
-
out of -

Re-Attempt Weekly Quiz Competition

Topics of Law Test 62

Result

Topics of Law Test 62

Score

-

Rank

-

SHARING IS CARING

Question 1

Promise

Contract

Obligation

Lawful Promise

Question 2

Mr. X can file a suit against his friends for not attending to the dinner

Mr. X cannot have any remedy

Mr. X can recover the expenses incurred for the arrangements from his friends

Mr. X can file a suit for the special damages

Question 3

B is guilty of breach of contract and is liable to pay damage.

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.

Solution

Question 4

valid contract

voidable contract

void agreement

void contract

Question 5

promise

contract

offer

acceptance

Question 6

Void ab initio

Voidable

Valid

Unlawful

Solution

Question 7

Sanju is well protected because she relied on Manju in all good faith.

Sapju is well, protected because Manju never specifically. asked here. about the above issues and so she remained silent.

Sanju has a duty to speak and disclose the above issues.

Sanju has no duty to speak and disclose the above issues It is the duty of DDICCA and its representatives to ask whatever is required

Question 8

T will be liable to compensate the loss to ABC.

T started the new coaching centre near ABC intentionally, and shall be liable to compensate the loss of ABC.

T should have consulted ABC before starting his coaching centre.

T has not violated any of ABC's legal right though they sustained some financial loss, and not legally bound to compensate ABC.

Solution

Question 9

Along with A, the person who stabbed X, B and C are also guilty of murder because A stabbed X in furtherance of common intention

Along with A, B and C are also guilty of murder because A, at the time of stabbing X, was acting on behalf of B and C and he wanted to save not only himself but B and C aw well

A alone is guilty of murder because though there was common intention to commit the offence of burglary, there was no common intention to commit the offence of murder

None of the above

Solution

Question 10

void

voidable

illegal

none of the above

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.