CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Directions:The question is based on the reaso... Start Learning for Free
Directions: 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.
The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.
Q. X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.
  • a)
    The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.
  • b)
    The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as it's on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.
  • c)
    The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.
  • d)
    The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Verified Answer
Directions:The question is based on the reasoning and arguments or fac...
Here, the contract cannot be specifically enforced as the court shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property can be adequately relieved by compensation in money unless and until the contrary is proved.
Here, X contracted to sell land to Y and also agreed to pay $50,000 to B in case of default. Y accepted the terms of the contract and according to the contract, compensation in money was regarded as an adequate relief in case of breach of contract. Hence, the court will award the compensation as agreed between X and Y.
View all questions of this test
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X appointed Y as the trustee of his school as X was moving abroad for a month. He instructed Y to lease the playgrounds to PQR Academy during summers. The director of PQR Academy had a talk with X before X left the country regarding leasing of 10 classrooms, to be used as dressing rooms. X was willing for it but wanted time for consideration citing reason that those classrooms were under repairs. On the time of execution of lease deed, the director of PQR Academy discussed it with Y and asked him to include the classrooms as well, as repairs were over. Y got the lease deed registered with required addition. On his return, X took the possession of the classrooms. PQR Academy sued X for specific performance of the lease deed. Decide.

Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X was fascinated about the vintage car of his neighbour Y. X engaged Y in a manner that for paying a sum much higher, he would purchase Ys car; also he gave Y earnest money. Y agreed to it and signed the written agreement for handing over the possession of the car. However, late at night, he got emotional about the way his father cherished the car. Next day, X approached Y with decided cash and the written agreement. Y, however, declined the same. X filed a petition for specific enforcement of the said agreement.

Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracts with Y (aged 17 years) for purchasing Ys online game character for $9999. Y agreed to the same; however, he later refused to sell. X sued Y for the same. Decide.

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.

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.

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. 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 Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: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.The Specific Relief Act provides for specific reliefs. Specific relief means relief of certain species, i.e. an exact or particular, a named, fixed or determined relief. The term is generally understood as providing relief of a specific kind rather than a general relief or damages or compensation. It is a remedy which aims at the exact fulfilment of an obligation or specific performance of the contract, i.e if some body unlawfully dispossesses someone of his property, the general relief may be requiring the defendant to pay the other party compensation equivalent to the loss suffered by him due to dispossession. Specific relief may enable to have the possession of the same property over again by requiring the defendant to restore possession of the property. Specific performance is generally granted when there exists no standard for ascertaining actual damage, say, there is sale of picture by the dead painter, or where compensation in money will not provide adequate relief to the plaintiff. S. 10 of the Act provides the conditions where the specific performance of contract is enforceable. According to it, the specific performance of any contract may, in the discretion of the court, be enforced when there exists no standard for ascertaining the actual damage caused by the non-performance of the act agreed to be done or when the act agreed to be done is such that compensation in money for its non-performance would not afford adequate relief. But in the exercise of this discretion, the court is governed by certain principles. The explanation to the section states that the court in case of immovable property shall presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation in money; and that the breach of a contract to transfer movable property can be so relieved except in the cases where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce, or is of special value or interest to the person, or consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market; or where the property is held by the defendant as the agent or trustee of the plaintiff. It would be burden of defendants to demonstrate that the breach can be adequately compensated. Section 11(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 provides that a contract made by a trustee in excess of his powers or in breach of trust cannot be specifically enforced. Also, the contract to be specifically enforced must be mutual. The doctrine of mutuality means that the contract must be mutually enforceable by each party against the other. It does not, however, mean that for every right there must be corresponding clause. A contract may contain series of clauses and covenants which form the total bargain between the parties, and each of them is the consideration for the other. It means each party to the contract must have the freedom to enforce his right under the contract against each other.Q.X contracted to sell his 10 acres land to Y and also promised to pay Y $50,000 in default, to which Y agreed. X got a better deal from Z [a multimillionaire], who wanted to set up an industry on 4 acres of land of X for the same amount Y was paying for the whole of land. X did not reveal the same to Y and sold 4 acres to Z. Y demanded for specific performance of the contract between X and Y.a)The same can be done as the court in case of immovable property may presume that the breach of a contract to transfer immovable property cannot be adequately relieved by compensation.b)The same can be done as the court can cancel the sale of 4 acres of land as its on the discretion of court to enforce a contract specifically.c)The same cannot be done as the court can fix adequate compensation in this matter which is 75% of money paid by Z as Z paid double the amount Y had to pay.d)The same cannot be done due to the promise of X to compensate in case of default.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev