CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By...
Start Learning for Free
The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correct
- a)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promise
- b)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debt
- c)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the act
- d)none of the above
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become bar...
The mother is liable to pay her daughter since she has signed a written agreement with her..
Free Test
FREE
| Start Free Test |
Community Answer
The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become bar...
Contract and Limitation Act:
The Limitation Act is a law that sets a time limit for when a legal action can be initiated. It provides a time period within which a person can file a lawsuit to enforce their rights. Once the time limit specified by the Act has expired, the claim becomes time-barred, meaning that it cannot be enforced through legal proceedings.
Analysis of the Scenario:
In this scenario, the mother owes Rs. 10,000 to her daughter, but the debt has become barred by the Limitation Act. Subsequently, the mother signs a written promise to pay Rs. 3,000 on account of the debt. We need to determine the validity and enforceability of this promise.
Option A: There is no contract because the debt is already barred by the limitation and cannot be revived by a subsequent promise.
This option is incorrect because the Limitation Act does provide for certain exceptions where a time-barred debt can be revived by a subsequent promise. Therefore, the mere fact that the debt is time-barred does not automatically render any subsequent promise invalid.
Option B: There is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of the time-barred debt.
This option is also incorrect because the mother's promise to pay Rs. 3,000 on account of the debt is a valid and enforceable promise. The fact that it is only a partial payment does not invalidate the promise.
Option C: This is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the Act.
This option is correct. As per Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act, a time-barred debt can be revived by a subsequent promise to pay the debt, even if it is only a partial payment. The mother's written promise to pay Rs. 3,000 on account of the debt is a valid and binding promise, despite the debt being time-barred. Therefore, the daughter can enforce this promise against the mother.
Option D: None of the above.
This option is incorrect as the correct answer is option C.
Conclusion:
In this case, the mother's promise to pay Rs. 3,000 on account of the time-barred debt is valid and enforceable under the Indian Contract Act. The daughter can take legal action to enforce this promise and recover the promised amount from her mother.
The Limitation Act is a law that sets a time limit for when a legal action can be initiated. It provides a time period within which a person can file a lawsuit to enforce their rights. Once the time limit specified by the Act has expired, the claim becomes time-barred, meaning that it cannot be enforced through legal proceedings.
Analysis of the Scenario:
In this scenario, the mother owes Rs. 10,000 to her daughter, but the debt has become barred by the Limitation Act. Subsequently, the mother signs a written promise to pay Rs. 3,000 on account of the debt. We need to determine the validity and enforceability of this promise.
Option A: There is no contract because the debt is already barred by the limitation and cannot be revived by a subsequent promise.
This option is incorrect because the Limitation Act does provide for certain exceptions where a time-barred debt can be revived by a subsequent promise. Therefore, the mere fact that the debt is time-barred does not automatically render any subsequent promise invalid.
Option B: There is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of the time-barred debt.
This option is also incorrect because the mother's promise to pay Rs. 3,000 on account of the debt is a valid and enforceable promise. The fact that it is only a partial payment does not invalidate the promise.
Option C: This is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the Act.
This option is correct. As per Section 25(3) of the Indian Contract Act, a time-barred debt can be revived by a subsequent promise to pay the debt, even if it is only a partial payment. The mother's written promise to pay Rs. 3,000 on account of the debt is a valid and binding promise, despite the debt being time-barred. Therefore, the daughter can enforce this promise against the mother.
Option D: None of the above.
This option is incorrect as the correct answer is option C.
Conclusion:
In this case, the mother's promise to pay Rs. 3,000 on account of the time-barred debt is valid and enforceable under the Indian Contract Act. The daughter can take legal action to enforce this promise and recover the promised amount from her mother.
|
Explore Courses for CLAT exam
|
|
Top Courses for CLATView all
Question Description
The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of
The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an
ample number of questions to practice The mother owes Rs. 10000 to her daughter. By this debt has become barred by the limitation act. The mother signs a written promise to par Rs. 3000 on account of the debt. In this case which one of the following is correcta)there is no contract because as the debt already barred by the limitation and so it cannot be revived by a subsequent promiseb)there is no contract because the mother has promised to give only a part of time-barred debtc)this is enforceable against the mother because such a promise is valid and binding under the actd)none of the aboveCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
|
|
Explore Courses for CLAT exam
|
|
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup to see your scores
go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup