Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than oneandrsquo;s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: andlsquo;Mandrsquo;, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with andlsquo;Fandrsquo;, father of the child, whereby andlsquo;Fandrsquo; agrees to pay to andlsquo;Mandrsquo; Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, andlsquo;Fandrsquo; refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that andlsquo;Mandrsquo; was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between andlsquo;Mandrsquo; and andlsquo;Fandrsquo;d)The agreement between andlsquo;Mandrsquo; and andlsquo;Fandrsquo; is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not...

Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.

a)
The father should be liable to pay
b)
The father should not be liable to pay
c)
There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’
d)
The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is void

Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Verified Answer

Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a prom...

According to given principle, doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration. In the given case the father should be liable. To maintain a person’s child has always been recognised as good consideration. So, according to the given principle the father would be liable to pay for the maintenance of child.

View all questions of this test

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Principle Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.

View answer

Directions: Questions 21-24 are based on a common set of Principles and Facts. Answer accordingly.Principle 1 – An offer is made when one person signifies to another, his willingness to do or not do something, with a view to obtaining that person‘s assent.Principle 2 – When the person to whom the offer is made signifies his assent thereto, the offer is said to be accepted.Principle 3 - When, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee or any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise.Principle 4 – An agreement without consideration is not enforceable under law.Principle 5 – Parties to a contract must agree upon the same thing in the same sense.Principle 6 – Parties competent to contract must be major, and of sound mind.Facts – Sonia is a gardener in the mansion of Mr. Kapoor. Mr. Kapoor is extremely fond of his pet dog, Cooper. One day, Kapoor realizes that Cooper is missing from his kennel. He is frantic with worry, and sends Sonia on a quest for the dog. Sonia sets out, pastes notices in public places and enquires about the dog. She has been instructed to return only if she finds the dog. In the meantime, Kapoor announces in the popular newspaper, The Statesman, that Cooperis missing, and that anybody who finds the Labrador and brings him back would be awarded a sum of Rs. 10,000. The next day, Kaza brings a brown Labrador with him and claims the reward. Mr. Kapoor immediately realizes that the dog is not Cooper, and refuses to pay the sum. Kaza asserts that the dog is named Cooper, is a brown Labrador resembling the picture in the newspaper, and since he has accepted the offer by bringing the dog, there is a valid contract formed, and Kapoor is bound to pay the consideration of Rs. 10,000. Three days later, Sonia manages to find Cooper in a nearby park, and brings him back home. Kapoor is overjoyed, and raises Sonia‘s salary from Rs. 12,000 per month to Rs. 20,000. Sonia then discovers the notice in the newspaper, goes to Kapoor, and claims the reward. Kapoor refuses to pay, as he as already given her an increment in salary.Q.Does Kaza‘s argument stand? Has there been a valid contract formed between Kazaand and Kapoor?

View answer

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Sec. 126 of the Indian Contract Act, defines a contract of guarantee as "A contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability of a third person in case of his defaults". A guarantee may be either "oral" or "written". Just like any other contracts, it should also fulfill all the essentials of a valid contract. As stated already, three parties are involved in a contract of guarantee.All the three parties namely, the principal debtor, the creditor and the surety must agree to make such a contract. A contract of guarantee pre-supposes the existence of a liability, which is enforceable at law. If no such liability exists, there can be no contract of guarantee. Thus, where the debt, which is sought to be guaranteed, is already time barred or void, the surety is not liable. There must be consideration between the creditor and the surety so as to make the contract enforceable. The consideration must also be lawful. In a contract of guarantee, the consideration received by the principal debtor is taken to be the sufficient consideration for the surety. Thus, any benefit received by the debtor is adequate consideration to bind the surety. But past consideration is no consideration for a contract of guarantee. There must be a fresh consideration moving from the creditor. A contract of guarantee may either be oral or written. In a contract of guarantee, liability of the surety is secondary, i.e. the creditor must first proceed against the debtor and if the latter does not perform his promise, then only he can proceed against the surety. It may be express or implied from the conduct of parties. The creditor should disclose to the surety the facts that are likely to affect the suretys liability. The guarantee obtained by the concealment of such facts is invalid. Thus, the guarantee is invalid if the creditor obtains it by the concealment of material facts The guarantee should not be obtained by misrepresenting the facts to the surety. Though the contract of guarantee is not a contract of uberrimae fidei, i.e. of absolute good faith, and thus, does not require complete disclosure of all the material facts by the principal debtor or creditor to the surety before he enters into a contract. But the facts, that are likely to affect the extent of suretys responsibility, must be truly represented.Q.Chetan lends money to Ashu. Chetan while signing the contract asks Ashu if she has a guarantor. Ashu without any intimation to Anuj gave his name as the guarantor. Ashu later on convinced Anuj to be the guarantor, but upon Ashus default, Anuj refused to pay. Decide.

View answer

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Sec. 126 of the Indian Contract Act, defines a contract of guarantee as "A contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability of a third person in case of his defaults". A guarantee may be either "oral" or "written". Just like any other contracts, it should also fulfill all the essentials of a valid contract. As stated already, three parties are involved in a contract of guarantee.All the three parties namely, the principal debtor, the creditor and the surety must agree to make such a contract. A contract of guarantee pre-supposes the existence of a liability, which is enforceable at law. If no such liability exists, there can be no contract of guarantee. Thus, where the debt, which is sought to be guaranteed, is already time barred or void, the surety is not liable. There must be consideration between the creditor and the surety so as to make the contract enforceable. The consideration must also be lawful. In a contract of guarantee, the consideration received by the principal debtor is taken to be the sufficient consideration for the surety. Thus, any benefit received by the debtor is adequate consideration to bind the surety. But past consideration is no consideration for a contract of guarantee. There must be a fresh consideration moving from the creditor. A contract of guarantee may either be oral or written. In a contract of guarantee, liability of the surety is secondary, i.e. the creditor must first proceed against the debtor and if the latter does not perform his promise, then only he can proceed against the surety. It may be express or implied from the conduct of parties. The creditor should disclose to the surety the facts that are likely to affect the suretys liability. The guarantee obtained by the concealment of such facts is invalid. Thus, the guarantee is invalid if the creditor obtains it by the concealment of material facts The guarantee should not be obtained by misrepresenting the facts to the surety. Though the contract of guarantee is not a contract of uberrimae fidei, i.e. of absolute good faith, and thus, does not require complete disclosure of all the material facts by the principal debtor or creditor to the surety before he enters into a contract. But the facts, that are likely to affect the extent of suretys responsibility, must be truly represented.Q.Chetna advances loan of Rs 1 lakh to Chitra. Palak, boss of Chitra, promises that in case Chitra fails to repay the loan, she will repay the same. Chitra fails to repay the loan upon being declared bankrupt. Chetna filed a case against Palak for default. Decide.

View answer

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.Sec. 126 of the Indian Contract Act, defines a contract of guarantee as "A contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability of a third person in case of his defaults". A guarantee may be either "oral" or "written". Just like any other contracts, it should also fulfill all the essentials of a valid contract. As stated already, three parties are involved in a contract of guarantee.All the three parties namely, the principal debtor, the creditor and the surety must agree to make such a contract. A contract of guarantee pre-supposes the existence of a liability, which is enforceable at law. If no such liability exists, there can be no contract of guarantee. Thus, where the debt, which is sought to be guaranteed, is already time barred or void, the surety is not liable. There must be consideration between the creditor and the surety so as to make the contract enforceable. The consideration must also be lawful. In a contract of guarantee, the consideration received by the principal debtor is taken to be the sufficient consideration for the surety. Thus, any benefit received by the debtor is adequate consideration to bind the surety. But past consideration is no consideration for a contract of guarantee. There must be a fresh consideration moving from the creditor. A contract of guarantee may either be oral or written. In a contract of guarantee, liability of the surety is secondary, i.e. the creditor must first proceed against the debtor and if the latter does not perform his promise, then only he can proceed against the surety. It may be express or implied from the conduct of parties. The creditor should disclose to the surety the facts that are likely to affect the suretys liability. The guarantee obtained by the concealment of such facts is invalid. Thus, the guarantee is invalid if the creditor obtains it by the concealment of material facts The guarantee should not be obtained by misrepresenting the facts to the surety. Though the contract of guarantee is not a contract of uberrimae fidei, i.e. of absolute good faith, and thus, does not require complete disclosure of all the material facts by the principal debtor or creditor to the surety before he enters into a contract. But the facts, that are likely to affect the extent of suretys responsibility, must be truly represented.Q.Anjan supplies goods to Neel on Lavins guarantee that he will pay if Neel defaults and he provides guarantee orally. He agreed to sign a contract later on. Neel made a default on payment. Having not signed the contract of guarantee, Lavin wanted to wriggle out of the situation. He said he didnt stand as a guarantor. Decide.

View answer

Top Courses for CLATView all

Current Affairs: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

Legal Reasoning for CLAT

Lucent for GK

Crash Course for CLAT

CLAT Mock Test Series 2026

Top Courses for CLAT

View all

Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Principle: Performance of a legal duty is not consideration for a promise. Consideration must be something more than what the promisee is already bound to do. But doing or agreeing to do more than one’s legal duty will serve as a consideration.Facts: ‘M’, the mother of an illegitimate child, makes a contract with ‘F’, father of the child, whereby ‘F’ agrees to pay to ‘M’ Rs 200 per month in consideration for maintaining the child. After paying the promised amount for 6 months, ‘F’ refuses to pay the same and takes the defence that ‘M’ was performing only the statutory duty to maintain the child and therefore there was no consideration for the promise.a)The father should be liable to payb)The father should not be liable to payc)There was not a valid agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’d)The agreement between ‘M’ and ‘F’ is voidCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.

Explore Courses for CLAT exam