CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Tests  >  Additional Study Material for CLAT  >  Legal Mock Test - 16 - CLAT MCQ

Legal Mock Test - 16 - CLAT MCQ


Test Description

30 Questions MCQ Test Additional Study Material for CLAT - Legal Mock Test - 16

Legal Mock Test - 16 for CLAT 2024 is part of Additional Study Material for CLAT preparation. The Legal Mock Test - 16 questions and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus.The Legal Mock Test - 16 MCQs are made for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests for Legal Mock Test - 16 below.
Solutions of Legal Mock Test - 16 questions in English are available as part of our Additional Study Material for CLAT for CLAT & Legal Mock Test - 16 solutions in Hindi for Additional Study Material for CLAT course. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free. Attempt Legal Mock Test - 16 | 40 questions in 30 minutes | Mock test for CLAT preparation | Free important questions MCQ to study Additional Study Material for CLAT for CLAT Exam | Download free PDF with solutions
Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 1

Astha, who is a very good painter, is also a patient in a mental asylum, who, at intervals, is of sound mind. During one of these intervals, she entered into a relationship with Lopamudra to paint a picture of her for a specified amount. She, however, asked Lopamudra to pay her the entire amount in advance. One month later, on the day of delivery of the painting, Astha refused to perform the contract saying that she suffers from insanity. Can Lopamudra force performance?
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 interests.

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 1

There was a binding contract between Astha and Lopa since Astha though a patient in was in fit state of mind at the time of entering into contract. Competent as per law. She also took advance money and now refusing on false excuse of insanity. The contract is fully justified according to principle and Lopa can enforce performance. 

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 2

Legal Principle: A counter offer doesn't give rise to contractual binding.
Factual Situation: Aman offered to sell a Rolls Royce for $1,500 to Xiaomi who said he would give $800. Aman refused and Xiaomi who then said he would give $1,500. Aman declined to adhere to his original offer and Xiaomi tried to obtain specific performance in the court. Decide as a judge?
Issue: Is there a valid contract between Aman and Xiaomi?
Decision:

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 2

The original offer was not accepted by Xiaomi and thus his claim for specific performance will fail in the court.

1 Crore+ students have signed up on EduRev. Have you? Download the App
Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 3

Which State provided separate reservation for Muslims and Christians in the State Backward Classes List in 2007?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 3

Tamil Nadu Government has declared the decks to promulgate an ordinance to introduce reservations for Christrians and Muslims of backward caste denominations to the extent of 3.5 percent each from Sep 14, 2007.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 4

Offence which can be compromised between the parties is known as

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 4

Compoundable offences are less serious criminal offences and are of two different types mentioned in tables in Section 320 of the CrPC, as follows: 1. Court permission is not required before compounding – Examples of these offences include adultery, causing hurt, defamation criminal trespass.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 5

Principle: Nothing which is not intended to cause death, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to cause, or be known by the doer to be likely to cause, to any person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, and who has given a consent, whether express or implied, to suffer that harm, or to take the risk of that harm.

Q. A fake doctor operated on a man for internal piles by cutting them out with an kitchen ordinary knife. The man died of haemorrhage.

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 5

From a perusal it is not shown that Doctor intended to cause death or has knowledge albeit ordinarily a man is supposed to know the consequence of operating without any skill and without appropriate tools of operation. There is no consent also by the patient.Be that as it may, he caused the death, he is liable for culpable homicide not murder. 

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 6

Principle: Nothing which is not intended to cause death, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to cause, or be known by the doer to be likely to cause, to any person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, and who has given a consent, whether express or implied, to suffer that harm, or to take the risk of that harm.

Q. Dr Mortimer performed a kidney operation upon James for removal of kidney stones. James was already affected by HIV. Dr Mortimer had warned James of all the possible risks. James, out of his own volition, decided to undertake the risks and signed a bond certifying the same. James died of haemorrhage as a result of the operation.

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 6

Doctor has warned James about possible risks and despite fully knowing everything James took the risk out of his free ill .doctor did not intend to cause death.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 7

A person ‘dying intestate’ mean he

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 7

Intestate means when person dies without making a will, which is capable of taking effect. If A has left no will as to who will be the owner of his property after his death,  he has died intestate in the eyes of law. 

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 8

Communication of offer and acceptance is must for a valid contract.
Factual Situation: A proposes by speed post, to sell a watch to B at a definite price. A revokes his proposal by email after 6 hours to B.
Issue: Whether the revocation of an offer is valid?
Decision:

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 8

Revocation must be done before B has accepted the proposal. A has revoked before post reached B.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 9

A person commits cheating, when he fraudulently induces another person to deliver the latter's property to him.
Facts: A falsely represented to B, a shop owner that he was an officer from the Sales Tax Department. In the course of going through the vouchers, A expressed his interest to buy, a costly television on installment basis. B readily agreed hoping that he would get a favourable assessment from A regarding his tax liability. A paid the first installment and took the T.V. and disappeared. The police somehow managed to arrest him and sought to prosecute 'A' for cheating. Decide. 

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 9

Firstly, A falsely impersonated as a Sales Tax officer to buy a television and secondly, he fraudulently induced B to sell that to him. He is liable for cheating.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 10

If a witness makes a statement in Court, knowing it to be false, he commits the offence of

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 10

If a witness makes a statement in Court, knowing it to be false, he commits the offence of. Forgery. Falsehood.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 11

Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death commits culpable homicide; punishable under Indian Penal Code.
Facts: Bandipur is a protected area wherein hunting is totally forbidden. Kannan, a poacher, stealthily entered this area and he shot at a deer. He missed the target and the bullet hits the forest guard relaxing nearby, whom Kannan had not seen. The forest guard was killed. Decide whether Kannan is guilty of culpable homicide. (NLSIU-1998)

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 11

Kanan will not be liable for killing the forest guard as he had no intention to kill him. He will be liable for trespassing the Forest Land, Attempt to poach etc. but not for killing the forest guard as both for homicide and Murder, intention needs to be proved.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 12

What is the meaning of the Latin Maxim/Legal Word/ Legal Term ‘Impotentia excusat legem”?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 12

IMPOTENTIA EXCUSAT LEGEM. Latin, meaning Impossibility is an excuse in the law. IGNORANTIA FACTI EXCUSAT IGNORANTIA JURIS NON EXCUSAT Latin, meaning Ignorance of fact excuses; ignorance of law does not excuse. IGNORANCE OF THE LAW A common phrase meaning that all citizens are required to know the law.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 13

Which of the following is the major source of the Indian Constitution?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 13

The major sources of the Indian Constitution is Government of India Act 1935 Federal Scheme Emergency Provisions Public Service Commissions Office of Governor Judiciary Administrative Details.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 14

G.O.I floats a tender for making bridges in his industrial township. This tender is of the nature of _________.

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 14

The invitation to offer is made to inform the public, the terms and conditions on which a person is interested in entering into a contract with the other party. Although the former party is not an offeror as he is not making an offer instead, he is stimulating people to offer him. Therefore, the acceptance does not amount to a contract, but an offer. When the former party accepts, the offer made by the other parties, it becomes a contract, which is binding on the parties.
Example: Menu card of a restaurant showing the prices of food items Government Tender.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 15

Principles: A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property out of his or her possession, is said to commit theft.
B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage.
C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.
Facts: Draupadi, an old lady of 85 years, used to live with her granddaughter Subhadra. Draupadi was ill and therefore bedridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it ‘became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Subhadra hired a cleaner, Vinodji, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that may be there. There was a pile of old newspapers which Draupadi had stacked in a corner of her room. Vinodji asked Subhadra if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes, Vinodji took the pile to the municipality rubbish dump. While Vinodji was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Subhadra probably wouldn’t want this old painting back, especially because it was torn in several places and the colour was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old ‘masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mounting the painting, Vinodji pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear any more. By doing so, he made its professional ‘restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half. Vinodji’s neighbour Champi discovered that the painting belonged to Subhadra. With the motive of returning the painting to Subhadra, Champi climbed through an open window into Vinodji’s room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house.

Q. Has Vinodji committed theft?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 15

The act of Vinodji does not fall within the four corners of the definition of theft. 

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 16

Principles: A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property out of his or her possession, is said to commit theft.
B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage.
C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.
Facts: Draupadi, an old lady of 85 years, used to live with her granddaughter Subhadra. Draupadi was ill and therefore bedridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it ‘became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Subhadra hired a cleaner, Vinodji, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that may be there. There was a pile of old newspapers which Draupadi had stacked in a corner of her room. Vinodji asked Subhadra if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes, Vinodji took the pile to the municipality rubbish dump. While Vinodji was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Subhadra probably wouldn’t want this old painting back, especially because it was torn in several places and the colour was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old ‘masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mounting the painting, Vinodji pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear any more. By doing so, he made its professional ‘restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half. Vinodji’s neighbour Champi discovered that the painting belonged to Subhadra. With the motive of returning the painting to Subhadra, Champi climbed through an open window into Vinodji’s room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house.

Q. Is Vinodji guilty of criminal damage?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 16

There was no intention to damage. Vinodji rather wanted to keep the painting intact by pasting a paper. He was absolutely unaware of the factum of diminishing the value thereby. 

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 17

Principles: A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property out of his or her possession, is said to commit theft.
B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage.
C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.
Facts: Draupadi, an old lady of 85 years, used to live with her granddaughter Subhadra. Draupadi was ill and therefore bedridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it ‘became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Subhadra hired a cleaner, Vinodji, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that may be there. There was a pile of old newspapers which Draupadi had stacked in a corner of her room. Vinodji asked Subhadra if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes, Vinodji took the pile to the municipality rubbish dump. While Vinodji was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Subhadra probably wouldn’t want this old painting back, especially because it was torn in several places and the colour was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old ‘masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mounting the painting, Vinodji pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear any more. By doing so, he made its professional ‘restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half. Vinodji’s neighbour Champi discovered that the painting belonged to Subhadra. With the motive of returning the painting to Subhadra, Champi climbed through an open window into Vinodji’s room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house.

Q. If Vinodji had discovered the painting before leaving Subhadra’s house rather than at the rubbish dump, would he have been guilty of theft in this case?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 17

In that case she had a chance to take the consent as regards the taking the panting, so she would be guilty of theft.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 18

Principles: A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property out of his or her possession, is said to commit theft.
B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage.
C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.
Facts: Draupadi, an old lady of 85 years, used to live with her granddaughter Subhadra. Draupadi was ill and therefore bedridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it ‘became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Subhadra hired a cleaner, Vinodji, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that may be there. There was a pile of old newspapers which Draupadi had stacked in a corner of her room. Vinodji asked Subhadra if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes, Vinodji took the pile to the municipality rubbish dump. While Vinodji was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Subhadra probably wouldn’t want this old painting back, especially because it was torn in several places and the colour was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old ‘masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mounting the painting, Vinodji pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear any more. By doing so, he made its professional ‘restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half. Vinodji’s neighbour Champi discovered that the painting belonged to Subhadra. With the motive of returning the painting to Subhadra, Champi climbed through an open window into Vinodji’s room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house.

Q. Is Champi guilty of theft?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 18

In the act done by  Champi, all the ingriedients of theft are existing in order to constitute the offence of theft. So she is liable for theft for removing the painting from the  house of Vinodji.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 19

Principles: A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property out of his or her possession, is said to commit theft.
B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage.
C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.
Facts: Draupadi, an old lady of 85 years, used to live with her granddaughter Subhadra. Draupadi was ill and therefore bedridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it ‘became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Subhadra hired a cleaner, Vinodji, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that may be there. There was a pile of old newspapers which Draupadi had stacked in a corner of her room. Vinodji asked Subhadra if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes, Vinodji took the pile to the municipality rubbish dump. While Vinodji was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Subhadra probably wouldn’t want this old painting back, especially because it was torn in several places and the colour was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old ‘masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mounting the painting, Vinodji pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear any more. By doing so, he made its professional ‘restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half. Vinodji’s neighbour Champi discovered that the painting belonged to Subhadra. With the motive of returning the painting to Subhadra, Champi climbed through an open window into Vinodji’s room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house.

Q. Which of the following propositions could be inferred from the facts and the rules specified

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 19

The act of champi may be guilty of theft but her act does not attract any of the ingriendients of criminal damage. She just removed the painting from house of Vinod in his absence with motive to return. Nothing in the factual position to show that she wanted to damage it.  

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 20

What is the meaning of the Legal Maxim/ Legal Word/Legal Term “Champerty”?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 20

Means an illegal agreement in which a person with no previous interest in a lawsuit finances it with a view to sharing the disputed property if the suit succeeds.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 21

Principle: No Person shall be prosecuted for the same offence twice.
Facts: Rajiv Chanda was driving his BMW when he drove the car on the pathway and crushed three people to death. Due to lack of evidence he is acquitted, now the prosecution finds eye witness and evidence against him. They want to prosecute him again.

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 21

The factual situation states that Rajiv has been acquitted . if a person has acquitted he can not prosecuted again for the same offence. Had he been discharged then Rajiv could be prosecuted again upon finding new evidence.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 22

What is the meaning of the Legal Maxim/ Legal Word/Legal Term “Estoppel”?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 22

Estoppel. n. a bar or impediment (obstruction) which precludes a person from asserting a fact or a right or prevents one from denying a fact. Such a hindrance is due to a person's actions, conduct, statements, admissions, failure to act or judgment against the person in an identical legal case.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 23

Whoever induces or attempts to induce a candidate, or voter, to believe that he, or any person, who he is interested in, will become, or will be rendered, an object of divine displeasure, or spiritual censure, commits the offence of

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 23

Voluntarily interference with the free exercise of electoral right of some person is undue influence at an election. Undue influence occurs when one person persuades the other from doing what he wants to do  by using tacticts.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 24

Who heads the four members Committee appointed to study the Centre-State relations especially the changes took place since Sarkaria Commission

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 24

Yes Justice M.M Punchii 28th chief justice of India heads the Punchii commission which looks after the center state relation from 27th April 2007 .

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 25

Principles: A. A minor is a person who is below the age of eighteen. However, where a guardian administers the minor’s property, the age of majority is twentyone.
B. A minor is not permitted by law to enter into a contract. Hence, where a minor enters into a contract with a major person, the contract is not enforceable. This effectively means that neither the minor nor the other party can make any claim on the basis of the contract.
C. In a contract with a minor, if the other party hands over any money or confers any other benefit on the minor, the same shall not be recoverable from the minor unless the other party was deceived by the minor to hand over money or any other benefit. The other party will have to show that the minor misrepresented her age, he was ignorant about the age of the minor and that he handed over the benefit on the basis of such representation.
Facts: Animesh convinces Kumud, a girl aged 18 that she would sell her land to him. Kumud’s mother Parineeti is her guardian. Nonetheless Kumud, without the permission of Parineeti, sells the land to Animesh for a total sum of rupees fifty lakh, paid in full and final settlement of the price. Parineeti challenges this transaction claiming the Kumud is a minor and hence the possession of the land shall not be given to Animesh. Thus Animesh is in a difficult situation and has no idea how to recover his money from Kumud.

Q. Why is Parineeti justified in challenging the sale transaction?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 25

Prinittee is her guardian for administration of the property of kumud and therefore, she is justified in challenging the transaction entered into by Kumud. Kumud cannot enter into any transanction till she completes the age of 21. 

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 26

Principles: A. A minor is a person who is below the age of eighteen. However, where a guardian administers the minor’s property, the age of majority is twentyone.
B. A minor is not permitted by law to enter into a contract. Hence, where a minor enters into a contract with a major person, the contract is not enforceable. This effectively means that neither the minor nor the other party can make any claim on the basis of the contract.
C. In a contract with a minor, if the other party hands over any money or confers any other benefit on the minor, the same shall not be recoverable from the minor unless the other party was deceived by the minor to hand over money or any other benefit. The other party will have to show that the minor misrepresented her age, he was ignorant about the age of the minor and that he handed over the benefit on the basis of such representation.
Facts: Animesh convinces Kumud, a girl aged 18 that she would sell her land to him. Kumud’s mother Parineeti is her guardian. Nonetheless Kumud, without the permission of Parineeti, sells the land to Animesh for a total sum of rupees fifty lakh, paid in full and final settlement of the price. Parineeti challenges this transaction claiming the Kumud is a minor and hence the possession of the land shall not be given to Animesh. Thus Animesh is in a difficult situation and has no idea how to recover his money from Kumud.

Q. Animesh can be allowed to recover the money only if he can show that

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 26

Principle C is very much clear on this point. There should be misrepresentation on the part of minor as regards her/his age.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 27

Principles: A. A minor is a person who is below the age of eighteen. However, where a guardian administers the minor’s property, the age of majority is twentyone.
B. A minor is not permitted by law to enter into a contract. Hence, where a minor enters into a contract with a major person, the contract is not enforceable. This effectively means that neither the minor nor the other party can make any claim on the basis of the contract.
C. In a contract with a minor, if the other party hands over any money or confers any other benefit on the minor, the same shall not be recoverable from the minor unless the other party was deceived by the minor to hand over money or any other benefit. The other party will have to show that the minor misrepresented her age, he was ignorant about the age of the minor and that he handed over the benefit on the basis of such representation.
Facts: Animesh convinces Kumud, a girl aged 18 that she would sell her land to him. Kumud’s mother Parineeti is her guardian. Nonetheless Kumud, without the permission of Parineeti, sells the land to Animesh for a total sum of rupees fifty lakh, paid in full and final settlement of the price. Parineeti challenges this transaction claiming the Kumud is a minor and hence the possession of the land shall not be given to Animesh. Thus Animesh is in a difficult situation and has no idea how to recover his money from Kumud.

Q. In order to defend the sale, Kumud will need to show that

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 27

As per law , in order to deal with her property, she has to be major. In her case, wherein there is guardian she will be treated major at the age of 21. So minority is the only thing coming in her way.

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 28

Principles: A. A minor is a person who is below the age of eighteen. However, where a guardian administers the minor’s property, the age of majority is twentyone.
B. A minor is not permitted by law to enter into a contract. Hence, where a minor enters into a contract with a major person, the contract is not enforceable. This effectively means that neither the minor nor the other party can make any claim on the basis of the contract.
C. In a contract with a minor, if the other party hands over any money or confers any other benefit on the minor, the same shall not be recoverable from the minor unless the other party was deceived by the minor to hand over money or any other benefit. The other party will have to show that the minor misrepresented her age, he was ignorant about the age of the minor and that he handed over the benefit on the basis of such representation.
Facts: Animesh convinces Kumud, a girl aged 18 that she would sell her land to him. Kumud’s mother Parineeti is her guardian. Nonetheless Kumud, without the permission of Parineeti, sells the land to Animesh for a total sum of rupees fifty lakh, paid in full and final settlement of the price. Parineeti challenges this transaction claiming the Kumud is a minor and hence the possession of the land shall not be given to Animesh. Thus Animesh is in a difficult situation and has no idea how to recover his money from Kumud.

Q. Which of the following is correct?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 28

Animesh should not be allowed to abuse the law legislated for  the protection of minor. Inducement on his part clearly shows that he is exploiting the minor for taking wrongful benefits for himself. 

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 29

Principles: A. A minor is a person who is below the age of eighteen. However, where a guardian administers the minor’s property, the age of majority is twentyone.
B. A minor is not permitted by law to enter into a contract. Hence, where a minor enters into a contract with a major person, the contract is not enforceable. This effectively means that neither the minor nor the other party can make any claim on the basis of the contract.
C. In a contract with a minor, if the other party hands over any money or confers any other benefit on the minor, the same shall not be recoverable from the minor unless the other party was deceived by the minor to hand over money or any other benefit. The other party will have to show that the minor misrepresented her age, he was ignorant about the age of the minor and that he handed over the benefit on the basis of such representation.
Facts: Animesh convinces Kumud, a girl aged 18 that she would sell her land to him. Kumud’s mother Parineeti is her guardian. Nonetheless Kumud, without the permission of Parineeti, sells the land to Animesh for a total sum of rupees fifty lakh, paid in full and final settlement of the price. Parineeti challenges this transaction claiming the Kumud is a minor and hence the possession of the land shall not be given to Animesh. Thus Animesh is in a difficult situation and has no idea how to recover his money from Kumud.

Q. Which of the following is correct?

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 29

As per law, minor is not  competent to enter into any contract. Even a minor cannot be asked to return any benefit given by any person to minor in lieu  of such contract. The Contract with minor is void abinitio. If some one violates the law, he should not be allowed to take any kind of benefit, otherwise the whole object of law will be frustrated. 

Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 30

A judge of the Supreme Court can be removed from office only on grounds of

Detailed Solution for Legal Mock Test - 16 - Question 30

The only conditions that can be grounds for their removal are proven misbehavior and incapacity to act as judge. Article 124 of the Constitution states that by an order of the President a Supreme Court justice can be removed from his or her office.

View more questions
1 videos|19 docs|124 tests
Information about Legal Mock Test - 16 Page
In this test you can find the Exam questions for Legal Mock Test - 16 solved & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving Questions and answers for Legal Mock Test - 16, EduRev gives you an ample number of Online tests for practice

Top Courses for CLAT

Download as PDF

Top Courses for CLAT