All India CLAT Group

If P + Q means P is the brother of Q; P × Q means P is the mother of Q; and P ÷ Q means P is the sister of Q, then which of the following would mean R is the uncle of S?
  • a)
    R × P + S
  • b)
    R × S + P
  • c)
    R + P × S
  • d)
    R ÷ P + S
  • e)
    None of these
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Sindhuja Menon answered  •  3 hours ago
Explanation:

Given:
- P + Q means P is the brother of Q
- P × Q means P is the mother of Q
- P ÷ Q means P is the sister of Q

To determine R is the uncle of S:
- Uncle means the brother of one's parent, which in this case would be the brother of the mother of S.

Analysis of options:
- a) R × P + S: This option in
... more

Principle: Ignorance of Fact is excused but ignorance of law is no excuse
Fact: X was a passenger from Zurich to Manila in a Swiss Plane. When the plane landed at the Airport of Mumbai on 28 Nov. 1962 it was found on searching that X carried 34 kg of Gold Bars on his person and that he had not declared it in the ‘Manifest for Transit’. On 26th Nov. 1962 the Government of India had issued a notification modifying its earlier exemption, making it mandatory now that the gold must be declared in the “Manifest” of the aircraft.
  • a)
    X cannot be prosecuted because he had actually no knowledge about the new notification issued two days ago
  • b)
    X cannot be prosecuted because ignorance of fact is excusable
  • c)
    X can be prosecuted because ignorance of law is not excusable
  • d)
    X’s liability would depend on the discretion of the court
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Sindhuja Menon answered  •  3 hours ago
Ignorance of Law vs Ignorance of Fact:
Ignorance of law is generally not considered a valid excuse for committing a crime. In this case, X can be prosecuted even if he was unaware of the new notification issued by the Government of India.

Legal Principle Application:
X can be prosecuted because ignorance of law is not excusable. Despite X not knowing about the n
... more

Principle: A contract is said to be induced by "undue influence" where the relations subsisting between the parties are such that one of the parties is in a position to dominate the will of the other and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage over the other. Such a contract is void.
Facts: Jasmeet is the owner of a small scale unit manufacturing detergent soap and powder. To add to the capacity of the unit he wanted to purchase some new machinery worth Rupees fifteen lacs for which he approached a bank. Taking into account the financial position of Jasmeet and higher risk of default associated with lending to a small scale unit; the bank manager agreed to lend the sum on 18.5% interest compounded annually even as the interest rate at which the bank lent to business houses was 12.5% on an average; and the sum was to be repaid in five years. Jasmeet paid first two instalments but refused to pay any further instalments citing the aforementioned principle.
Q. Decide on the question of the validity of the contract.
... more

Sindhuja Menon answered  •  3 hours ago
Explanation:

Contractual Validity
- The principle of undue influence applies when one party is in a position to dominate the will of the other and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage.
- In this case, the bank manager's position of authority and the higher interest rate imposed on Jasmeet could be considered as undue influence.

Analysis
... more
- The bank manager took advantage of Jasmeet's need for a loan by imposing a higher interest rate of 18.5% compared to the average rate of 12.5% for business houses.
- Jasmeet may have felt compelled to agree to the terms due to his financial situation and the difficulty in obtaining a loan elsewhere.

Conclusion
- While the contract may not be void, it could be argued that the bank used undue influence to secure the agreement.
- Jasmeet may have a legal basis to challenge the terms of the contract and negotiate for a lower interest rate.
- Ultimately, the validity of the contract will depend on the specific circumstances and evidence presented in court.

In a certain code language, "Tom Kun Sud" means "Dogs are barking", "Kun Jo Mop" means "Dogs and horse" and "Mut Tom Ko" means "Donkeys are mad". Which word in that language means "barking"?
Q. Which word in that language means ‘barking’?
  • a)
    Sud
  • b)
    Kun
  • c)
    Jo
  • d)
    Tom
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Sindhuja Menon answered  •  3 hours ago
Explanation:

Given Phrases:
1. "Tom Kun Sud" means "Dogs are barking"
2. "Kun Jo Mop" means "Dogs and horse"
3. "Mut Tom Ko" means "Donkeys are mad"

Finding the Word for "Barking":
To find the word that means "barking" in the given language, we need to look for a common word in the phrases that involve dogs and their actions.

... more

An insane person is exempted from criminal liability because
  • a)
    his mind is not clear
  • b)
    crimes are committed out of impulse
  • c)
    means rea is lacking in him
  • d)
    None of the answers is correct
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Sindhuja Menon answered  •  4 hours ago
Insanity and Criminal Liability:
Insanity is a legal concept that refers to a state of mind where an individual is unable to differentiate between right and wrong, or is unable to understand the consequences of their actions. In criminal law, insanity can be used as a defense to avoid criminal liability.

Exemption from Criminal Liability:
When a person is deemed
... more

His benevolence and kindness(A) / are (B) / admired by his friends.(C) / no error(D)
  • a)
    His benevolence and kindness
  • b)
    are
  • c)
    admired by his friends.
  • d)
    no error
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Sindhuja Menon answered  •  4 hours ago
Subject-Verb Agreement:
Subject-verb agreement means that the subject and verb in a sentence must agree in number. In this sentence, the subject is "His benevolence and kindness" which is a compound subject.

Explanation:
- The subject "His benevolence and kindness" is a compound subject because it consists of two nouns connected by "and."
- When a compound
... more

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. 10 Lakh to B on condition that B shall marry A’s daughter C. On the date on which A gave Rs. 10 Lakh to B, C was dead.
  • a)
    B’s interest in Rs. 10 Lakh fails because of impossibility
  • b)
    B’s interest in Rs. 10 Lakh fails because of immorality
  • c)
    B’s interest in Rs. 10 Lakh fails because of prohibition by law
  • d)
    B’s interest in Rs. 10 Lakh does not fail
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Sindhuja Menon answered  •  4 hours ago



Impossibility of Fulfillment:
The condition for B to marry A's daughter C is impossible to fulfill because C was already dead at the time when the condition was imposed. Therefore, B's interest in Rs. 10 Lakh fails due to impossibility.

Legal Prohibition:
There is no legal prohibition against B marrying C. The failure of the interest
... more

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 yr 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
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Sindhuja Menon answered  •  4 hours ago
Explanation:

Age of Consent:
- The principle states that a pact to suffer harm is not considered an offence if the person who has given consent is above eighteen years of age.

Scenario:
- In this case, A enters into a pact with B, who is less than 18 years old, to fence with each other for amusement.
- They agree to suffer any harm that may
... more

Principle: A contract is said to be induced by undue influence where the relations subsisting between the parties are such that one of the parties is in a position to dominate the will of the other and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage over the other.
FACTS: Sajjan Singh, advanced money to his step-son, Ghantilal while Ghantilal was a minor. Ghantilal, however, looks upon Sajjan Singh as his own father. When Ghantilal came of age, Sajjan Singh obtained, by misuse of parental influence, from Ghantilal, a bond for a greater amount than the sum due in respect of the advance. The contract clearly appears to be unconscionable.
Q. Upon whom will the burden of proof rest to prove the element of undue influence?
  • a)
    The burden of proof will rest on Ghantilal.
  • b)
    The burden of proof will rest on Sajjan Singh.
  • c)
    Undue influence has not been exercised at all because, in India, we consider it our duty to obey our parents.
  • d)
    Undue influence has been exercised because, though in India, we consider it our duty to obey our parents, we should not forget that Sajjan Singh was not Ghantilal’s father.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Sindhuja Menon answered  •  4 hours ago
Explanation:

Burden of Proof on Sajjan Singh:
- In cases of undue influence, the burden of proof rests on the party who is alleged to have exercised undue influence.
- In this case, Sajjan Singh is alleged to have misused his parental influence over Ghantilal to obtain an unconscionable advantage.
- Therefore, the burden of proof will rest on Sajjan Singh to
... more

Passage - 1
The fundamental rights were included in the constitution because they were considered essential for the development of the personality of every individual and to preserve human dignity. All people, irrespective of race, religion, caste or sex, have been given the right to move the Supreme Court and the High Courts for the enforcement of their fundamental rights. There are seven categories of Fundamental Rights (FR) which are covered from Articles 12-35. Fundamental right shall be made applicable only to the legislative or administrative actions of the state and not the private actions. Any law in
contravention of fundamental rights is void, unconstitutional and therefore cannot bind any person. It is a fundamental right that no person shall be denied admission into any educational institution maintained by State or receiving funds from the State only on the ground of religion, race, case, language or any of them. It is a fundamental right of all minorities whether based on religion or language shall have the right to institute or administer educational institution of their choice.
State shall not, in granting aid to the educational institution, discriminate against any educational institution on the ground that it is under the management of a minority, based on religion or language. It is a directive principle of state policy to promote with special care, educational interest of weaker section of people including scheduled tribes and castes. Directive principles are not justiciable in a court of law.
Q. If the parliament by law directs all minority schools, funded or non-funded, to admit Hindu students, then:
... more

Snehal gupta answered  •  6 hours ago
Explanation:

Fundamental Rights vs. Directive Principles of State Policy:
- Fundamental rights are justiciable, meaning they can be enforced in a court of law if violated.
- Directive principles of state policy are non-justiciable, meaning they cannot be enforced in a court of law.

Impact of the Parliament law:
- If the parliament by law di
... more

In a military camp there is sufficient food supply for 200 soldiers for 40 days. After 10 days, certain number of men join and everyone eats 50% more than earlier. Now the food lasts for another 10 days. How many soldiers joined the camp after 10 days?
  • a)
    150
  • b)
    300
  • c)
    250
  • d)
    200
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

Palak Sen answered  •  10 hours ago
Initial Scenario:
- Food supply for 200 soldiers for 40 days
- After 10 days, new soldiers join

Given Information:
- After 10 days, everyone eats 50% more than before
- Food lasts for another 10 days

Solution:
Let's assume the initial consumption rate for each soldier was x units per day.
Therefore, for 200 soldiers, the ini
... more

A tank can be filled in 30 minutes by 20 pumps. If five pumps go out of order, what time will be taken by the remaining pumps?
  • a)
    40 mins
  • b)
    38 mins
  • c)
    32 mins
  • d)
    30 mins
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Palak Sen answered  •  10 hours ago
Given Information:
- A tank can be filled in 30 minutes by 20 pumps.

Calculation:
- Each pump fills $\frac{1}{30 \times 20}$ of the tank in 1 minute.
- When 5 pumps go out of order, the number of working pumps becomes 15.

Time taken by remaining pumps:
- The remaining 15 pumps will fill the tank in $\frac{1}{30 \times 15}$ of the tank
... more
Fetching relevant content for you