Assam Judicial Services Prelims Mock Test - 3 - Judiciary Exams MCQ

One word substitution is Dotage.

Imbecility: Stupid or insane behaviour.

Youth: The period between childhood and adult age.

Dotage: The period of life in which a person is old and weak, especially with some loss of mental ability.

Superannuation: Regular payment made into a fund by an employee towards a future pension.

The correct answer is Nitrogen.

Key Points

• Nitrogen is the most abundant gas in Earth's atmosphere.
• The composition of gases in Earth's atmosphere:
  • Nitrogen(78.08%)
  • Oxygen(20.95%)
  • Argon(0.93%)
  • Carbon dioxide(0.036%)

Hint

• Code to remember the composition of gases in Earth's atmosphere is NO AC(Nitrogen, Oxygen, Argon, Carbon dioxide).

The United Nations works on addressing issues like climate change to protect the environment and ensure a sustainable future.

The correct answer is 'An ornament worn in front of turban'.

Key Points

• The Sarpech also known as an aigrette is an ornament worn in front of a turban.
• The turban ornament was worn by significant Hindu, Sikh, and Muslim princes.
• Sar means "head" or "front" and pech means "screw", giving the word "sarpech".
• The literal meaning is "that which is screwed onto the front (of the turban)".

Important Points

Specific performance is an equitable remedy in the law of contract, whereby a court issues an order requiring a party to perform a specific act, to complete performance of the contract.
According to section 10 of the Specific Relief Act, the specific performance of contract can be enforced in the following cases:-
1. If there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non performance of the act which agreed to be done
2. When pecuniary compensation for its non performance would not afford adequate relief
3. When it is probable that pecuniary compensation cannot be got for the non performance of the act agreed to be done

As per Civil Law is concerned "intention to defame" is simply irrelevant. It has only a limited role in deciding upon punitive damages but a court may find in the negative on this issue and still come across plenty of other reasons to award punitive damages against the defendant. The motive of the defendant is not material in determining his liability. Liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of defamation. In criminal law, intention has a lot of importance.

Cash in lieu of surety bond can be permitted under Section 445 Cr.P.C. It reads as when any person is required by any court or officer to execute a bond with or without sureties, such court or officer may, except in the case of a bond for good behaviour, permit him to deposit a sum of money or government promissory notes to such amount as the court or officer may fix in lieu of executing such bond.

This judgement was pronounced by the Court in the case of M. C. Mehta v. Union of India, 1986.
M. C. Mehta v. Union of India originated in the aftermath of oleum gas leak from Shriram Food and Fertilisers Ltd. complex at Delhi. This gas leak occurred soon after the infamous Bhopal gas leak and created a lot of panic in Delhi. The case lays down the principle of absolute liability and the concept of deep pockets.

The 42^nd Amendment amended the Preamble and changed the description of India from sovereign democratic republic to a sovereign, socialist secular democratic republic. It also changed the words unity of the nation to unity and integrity of the nation.

Section 500 of IPC deals with the punishment for defamation. It says that whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both.
Section 468(2)(c) of Cr.P.C. says that the period of limitation shall be three years, if the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, but not exceeding three years. Therefore, the time limit in Section 468 Cr.P.C. for taking cognisance in a case of defamation will be three years.

According to Section 60 of the CPC, the properties which are liable to be attached and sold in execution of a decree are, namely, lands, houses or other buildings, goods, money, bank notes, cheques, bills of exchange, hundis, promissory notes, government securities, bonds or other securities for money, debts, shares in a corporation and, save as hereinafter mentioned, all other saleable property, movable or immovable, belonging to the judgement debtor, or over which, or the profits of which, he has a disposing power which he may exercise for his own benefit, whether the same be held in the name of the judgement debtor or by another person in trust for him or on his behalf. Therefore, 'books and accounts' is not liable to be attached and sold in execution of a decree.

Section 22 of the Limitation Act, 1963, deals with the provision relating to continuing breaches and torts. It states that in case of a continuing breach of contract or a continuing tort, a fresh period of limitation shall begin to run at every moment of time during which the breach or the tort, as the case may be, continues.

'Certiorari' quashes the order of a lower court that has been without jurisdiction. If the court hears the cause or matter and gives a decision, then the party aggrieved would have to move the superior court for a writ of Certiorari and on that, an order will be made quashing the decision on the ground of want of jurisdiction.

Option (1) is correct: Under Section 101 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, whoever desires any court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts, must prove that those facts exist.
Option (2) is incorrect: B doesn't desire the court to give judgement, so he doesn't require to prove the existence of facts.
Option (3) is incorrect: C is not a party to offence, so he doesn't require to prove the existence of facts.

As per Order VIII, Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a set-off can be pleaded in the case for recovery of ascertained sum of money.
Also, the ascertained sum of money must be legally recoverable from the plaintiff.

Section 63 - Secondary evidence means and includes –
1. certified copies given under the provisions hereinafter contained
2. copies made from the original by mechanical processes, which in themselves ensure the accuracy of the copy and copies compared with such copies
3. copies made from or compared with the original
4. counterparts of documents as against the parties, who did not execute them
5. oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person, who has himself seen it

According to Section 2(j) of the Limitation Act, period of limitation means the period of limitation prescribed for any suit, appeal or application by the Schedule and prescribed period means the period of limitation computed in accordance with the provisions of the Limitation Act. Thus, option (1) is the answer.

As per Section 64 of the Act, where the mortgaged property is a lease, and the mortgagee obtains a renewal of the lease, the mortgagor, upon redemption, shall, in the absence of a contract by him to the contrary, have the benefit of the new lease. Thus, (2) is the correct option.
The previous lease has already expired. Thus, (3) cannot be the correct option. (1) is incorrect because such benefits are applicable.

The correct answer is both 1) and 2).

Key Points

• Section 2(i) of the Limitation Act, 1963, provides for the definition of plaintiff.
• It states that : “plaintiff” includes—
  (i) any person from or through whom a plaintiff derives his right to sue;
  (ii) any person whose estate is represented by the plaintiff as executor, administrator or other representative;

Section 390 in the Indian Penal Code:
Robbery—In all robbery, there is either theft or extortion. When theft is robbery—Theft is "robbery" if, in order to commit the theft, or in committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft, the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint. When extortion is robbery—Extortion is "robbery" if the offend­er, at the time of committing the extortion, is in the presence of the person put in fear, and commits the extortion by putting that person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint to that person or to some other person, and, by so putting in fear, induces the person so put in fear then and there to deliver up the thing extorted.
Explanation—The offender is said to be present if he is suffi­ciently near to put the other person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.
Thus, after death of a person, there can be no offence of robbery.

Ignorantia juris non excusat or ignorantia legis neminem excusat is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely by being unaware of its content. The rationale of the doctrine is that if ignorance were an excuse, a person charged with criminal offenses or a subject of a civil lawsuit would merely claim that one was unaware of the law in question to avoid liability, even if that person really does know what the law in question is. Thus, the law imputes knowledge of all laws to all persons within the jurisdiction no matter how transiently.

According to Section 12 in The Specific Relief Act, 1963
Where a party to a contract is unable to perform the whole of his part of it, but the part which must be left unperformed by only a small proportion to the whole in value and admits of compensation in money, the court may, at the suit of either party, direct the specific performance of so much of the contract as can be performed, and award compensation in money for the deficiency.

The word 'judgement' is derived after combining two words namely, judge and statement. It can also be termed as an act of judging or a statement of ground of an order . It is the conclusion or the result of judging. On the other hand, the term decree can be termed as the judicial decision in a litigated cause rendered by a Court of equity. It is the determination of a cause in a Court of admiralty or Court of probate. The Court, after the case has been heard, shall pronounce judgement, and on such judgement a decree shall follow. Section 33 of the Code of Civil Procedure describes the term 'Judgement and Decree' together.