Test: CLAT PG Mock Test - 1 - CLAT MCQ

A void marriage is a marriage which is unlawful or invalid under the laws of the jurisdiction where it is entered. A void marriage is "one that is void and invalid from its beginning. It is as though the marriage never existed and it requires no formality to terminate."
A marriage, however, which can be canceled at the option of one of the parties is merely voidable, meaning it is subject to cancellation if contested in court. A marriage that is entered into in good faith, but which is subsequently found to be void, may be recognized as a putative marriage and the spouses as putative spouses, with certain rights granted by statute or common law, notwithstanding that the marriage itself is void.

(a) Food corporation of India staff union v. Food corporation of India and others - (iv) Norms and procedure to be followed for assessing the representative character of Trade Union by a secret ballot system.
(b) Virudhachalam v. (i) Management of Lotus Mills union - Settlements are the "live wires" of the Act for ensuring industrial peace and prosperity.
(c) B. Srinivasa Reddy v. Karnataka water Supply and Drainage Board Employees Association - (ii) An unregistered trade union or trade whose registration has been cancelled has no right.
(d) Coir Board, Ernakulam, Cochin and another v. Indira Devi P.S. and others - (iii) Reflection of recent judicial trends on the interpretation of definition of industry.

The Fundamental Rights under Article 19 are automatically suspended and this suspension continues till the end of the emergency. But according to the 44th Amendment, Freedoms listed in Article 19 can be suspended only in case of proclamation on the ground of war or external aggression.

A "contingent contract" is a contract to do or not to do something, if some event, collateral to such contract, does or does not happen.
Illustration
A contracts to pay to B Rs. 10,000 if B's house is burnt. This is a contingent contract.

The Hindu Marriage Act is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted in 1955. Three other important acts were also enacted as part of the Hindu Code Bills during this time: the Hindu Succession Act, the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act.
(Act 25 of 1955)[18th May, 1955] An Act to amend and codify the law relating to marriage among Hindus. 1. ... (2) It extends to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir, and applies also to Hindus domiciled in the territories to which this Act extends who are outside the said territories.

A lockout is a temporary work stoppage or denial of employment initiated by the management of a company during a labor dispute.[1] That is different from a strike in which employees refuse to work. It is usually implemented by simply refusing to admit employees onto company premises and may include changing locks and hiring security guards for the premises. Other implementations include a fine for showing up or a simple refusal of clocking in on the time clock. It is therefore referred to as the antithesis of strike.

The Indian Christian Marriage Act of 1872 is an act of the Parliament of India regulating the legal marriage of Indian Christians. Under Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 the laws of the remedy of restitution of conjugal rights are not available.

The International Court of Justice, sometimes called the World Court, is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations. It settles disputes between states and gives advisory opinions on international legal issues referred to it by the UN. Its opinions and rulings serve as sources of international law.

Satyabrata Ghose v Mugneeram Bangur and Co - Coercion is the wrong pair.

The civil service is independent of government and composed mainly of career bureaucrats hired on professional merit rather than appointed or elected, whose institutional tenure typically survives transitions of political leadership. A civil servant or public servant is a person employed in the public sector on behalf of a government department or agency. 

A frustrated contract is a contract that, subsequent to its formation, and without fault of either party, is incapable of being performed due to an unforeseen event (or events), resulting in the obligations under the contract being radically different from those contemplated by the parties to the contract. Contract is frustrated due to frustration of subject matter of contract.

The Constitution (Forty Second) Amendment Act, 1976, breaks new ground by introducing the innovative concept of Fundamental Duties of the Indian citizens in the Constitution. For this purpose, a new part IV A consisting of Article 51 A has been added to the Constitution. Article 51 A lays down the following ten fundamental duties:-
(a) To abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and National Anthem;
(b) to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom;
(c) to uphold  and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India ;
(d) to defend the country and render national service when called upon to so ;
(e) to promote harmony and the spirit of  common brotherhood amongst all the people of India  diversities ; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of  women ;
(f) to value and preserve the right heritage of our composite culture ;
(g) to protect and improve the natural to have compassion for living creature ;
(h) to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform
(i) to safeguard public property and to adjure violence ;
(j) to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual  and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievements.
Article 51 A refers only to the Indian citizens unlike some Fundamental Rights, e.g., Articles 14 or 21, which apply to all persons whether citizens or non-citizens.

Malum prohibitum (plural mala prohibita, literal translation: "wrong [as or because] prohibited") is a Latin phrase used in law to refer to conduct that constitutes an unlawful act only by virtue of statute, as opposed to conduct that is evil in and of itself, or malum in se.
Conduct that is so clearly violative of society's standards for allowable conduct that it is illegal under English common law is usually regarded as malum in se. An offense that is malum prohibitum may not appear on the face to directly violate moral standards. The distinction between these two cases is discussed in State of Washington v. Thaddius X. Anderson:

(a) In Nottelohm's case the International Court of Justice held that in respect of grant of nationality there is no obligation of the states if that man has no relationship with the State of Naturalisation.
(c) Nationality is the principal link between an individual and international law.
These statements are incorrect.

“Whoever, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law shall be punished with imprisonment for life, to which fine may be added, or with imprisonment which may extend to three years, to which fine may be added, or with fine.
Dr Binayak Sen was accused of sedition by the Chhattisgarh government in 2011. An Indian paediatrician, public health specialist and activist, Dr Binayak Sen is the national vice-president of the People’s Union for Civil Liberties. He was accused of acting as a Maoist messenger.

Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 (“the Act”) gives defendants who have published material concerning matters of public interest a defence to an action for defamation. ... The public interest defence is a valuable one because it can apply regardless of the underlying truth or falsity of the statements complained of.In order to establish a claim of defamation, a claimant must prove that the defendant has published or is responsible for the publication of the defamatory material which is reasonably understood to refer to the claimant, either by name or by other means of identification.

404. Dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death.—Whoever dishonestly misappro­priates or converts to his own use property, knowing that such property was in the possession of a deceased person at the time of that person’s decease, and has not since been in the posses­sion of any person legally entitled to such possession, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if the offender at the time of such person’s decease was employed by him as a clerk or servant, the imprisonment may extend to seven years. Illustration Z dies in possession of furniture and money. His servant A, before the money comes into the possession of any person entitled to such possession, dishonestly misappropriates it. A has commit­ted the offence defined in this section.
CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE Punishment—Imprisonment for 3 years and fine—Non-Cognizable—Bail­able—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compoundable. If by clerk or person employed by deceased: Punishment—Imprisonment for 7 years and fine—Non-Cognizable—Bail­able—Triable by Magistrate of the first class—Non-compoundable.

A partnership arises whenever two or more people co-own a business and share in the profits and losses of the business. Other business legal structures include sole proprietorships, limited liability companies (LLCs), corporations, and nonprofit corporations.

Disqualification of MLA A person is disqualified on the following grounds:

• If he/ she holds any office of the profit under the central or state Government
• If he/ she is of unsound mind
• If he / she is an undischarged insolvent
• If he / she has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a Foreign country
• If he/ she is disqualified under any other law of the parliament such as anti-defection law.

According to Indian Contract Act, 1872 Section 2(b), "When the person to whom the proposal is made, signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted. A proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise."
Rules:-

• Acceptance should be absolute and unqualified. If the parties are not in ad idem on all matters concerning the offer and acceptance, there is no valid contract. For example, "A" says to "B" "I offer to sell my car for Rs.50,000/-. "B" replies "I will purchase it for Rs.45,000/-". This is not acceptance and hence it amounts to a counter offer.
• It should be Communicated to the offeror. To conclude a contract between parties, the acceptance must be communicated in some prescribed form. A mere mental determination on the part of offeree to accept an offer does not amount to valid acceptance.
• Acceptance must be in the mode prescribed. If the acceptance is not according to the mode prescribed or some usual and reasonable mode(where no mode is prescribed) the offeror may intimate to the offeree within a reasonable time that acceptance is not according to the mode prescribed and may insist that the offer be accepted in the prescribed mode only. If he does not inform the offeree, he is deemed to have accepted the offer. For example, "A" makes an offer to "B" says to "B" that "if you accept the offer, reply by voice. "B" sends reply by post. It will be a valid acceptance, unless "A" informs "B" that the acceptance is not according to the prescribed mode.
• Acceptance must be given within a reasonable time before the offer lapses. If any time limit is specified, the acceptance must be given within the time, if no time limit is specified it must be given within a reasonable time.
• It cannot precede an offer. If the acceptance precedes an offer it is not a valid acceptance and does not result in contract. For example, in a company shares were allotted to a person who had not applied for them. Subsequently, when he applied for shares, he was un aware of the previous allotment . The allotment of share previous to the application is not valid.

Acceptance by the way of conduct.
Mere silence is no acceptance.
Silence does not per-se amounts to communication- Bank of India Ltd. Vs. Rustom Cowasjee- AIR 1955 Bom. 419 at P. 430; 57 Bom. L.R. 850- Mere silence cannot amount to any assent. It does not even amount to any representation on which any plea of estoppel may be found, unless there is a duty to make some statement or to do some act free and offer er must be consent
Acceptance must be unambiguous and definite.
Acceptance cannot be given before communication of an offer.

Tort comes from the Latin word tortum, meaning "wrong." When someone has done some wrong to you, you can seek justice (in the form of payment) by taking them to court. Tortum itself comes from tortus (also Latin) meaning "twisted," but in the context of tort law, it is interpreted as "wrong."'.

The Social Justice Bench of the Supreme Court of India Today (In Re-Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons) issued further Guidelines relating to Prison Reforms in the Country. ‘Prison reforms have been the subject matter of discussion and decisions rendered by this Court from time to time over the last 35 years. Unfortunately, even though Article 21 of the Constitution requires a life of dignity for all persons, little appears to have changed on the ground as far as prisoners are concerned and we are once again required to deal with issues relating to prisons in the country and their reform’, said the Bench comprising of Justices Madan Lokur and R.K.Agrawal.

Two basic and the most important elements of crime are 'mens rea' and 'actus reus'.

Article 249 in The Constitution Of India 1949
249. Power of Parliament to legislate with respect to a matter in the State List in the national interest
(1) Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Chapter, if the Council of States has declared by resolution supported by not less than two thirds of the members present and voting that it is necessary or expedient in national interest that Parliament should make laws with respect to any matter enumerated in the State List specified in the resolution, it shall be lawful for Parliament to make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India with respect to that matter while the resolution remains in force
(2) A resolution passed under clause ( 1 ) shall remain in force for such period not exceeding one year as may be specified therein: Provided that, if and so often as a resolution approving the continuance in force of any such resolution is passed in the manner provided in clause ( 1 ), such resolution shall continue in force for a further period of one year from the date on which under this clause it would otherwise have ceased to be in force
(3) A law made by Parliament which Parliament would not but for the passing of a resolution under clause ( 1 ) have been competent to make shall, to the extent of the incompetency, cease to have effect on the expiration of a period of six months after the resolution has ceased to be in force, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before the expiration of the said period

Article 39A of the Constitution of India deals with Equal justice and free legal aid. The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.

An unlawful assembly as per section 141 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) means an assembly of 5 or more persons if the common object of the assembly is-

• To overawe by using criminal force or show criminal force, to Central or any State Government or Parliament or any State Legislature or any public servant; or
• To oppose the performance of any law or legal process; or
• To carry out any mischief or criminal trespass or any other offence; or
• By use of criminal force takes possession of any property or deprives any person of the right to the way or the use of water or any incorporeal right; or
• With the use or show of criminal force compels any person to do any illegal act.

A codicil is a testamentary document similar but not necessarily identical to a will. In some jurisdictions, it may serve to amend, rather than replace, a previously executed will. In others, it may serve as an alternative to a will.

A marriage which can be annulled or avoided at the option of one or both the parties is known as a voidable marriage. Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act contains relevant provisions of Voidable Marriage.
This section lays down four grounds on which a Hindu marriage becomes voidable. These are:
(1) Inability of the respondent to consummate the marriage on account of his or her impotency.
(2) Respondents incapacity to consent or suffering from a mental disorder.
(3) Consent of the petitioner being obtained by fraud or force.
(4) Concealment of Pre-marriage pregnancy by the respondent.

The last amendment to the Indian Succession Act was made in 2002.

This is the most proper form of repudiation of marriage. The reason is twofold: First, there is possibility of revoking the pronouncement before expiry of the Iddat period. Secondly, the evil words of Talaq are to be uttered only once. Being an evil, it is preferred that these words are not repeated.
In the Ahsan Talaq there is a single declaration during the period of purity followed by no revocation by husband for three successive period of purity. In this form, the following formalities are required:
(a) The husband has to make a single pronouncement of Talaq during the Tuhr of the wife. Tuhr is the period of wife’s parity i.e. a period between two menstruations. As such, the period of Tuhr is the period during which cohabitation is possible. But if a woman is not subjected to menstruation, either because of old age or due to pregnancy, a Talaq against her may be pronounced any time.
(b) After this single pronouncement, the wife is to observe an Iddat of three monthly courses. If she is pregnant at the time of pronouncement the Iddat is, till the delivery of the child. During the period of Iddat there should be no revocation of Talaq by the husband.
Revocation may be express or implied. Cohabitation with the wife is an implied revocation of Talaq. If the cohabitation takes place even once during this period, the Talaq is revoked and it is presumed that the husband has reconciled with the wife.
When the period of Iddat expires and the husband does not revoke the Talaq either expressly or through consummation, the Talaq becomes Irrevocable and final.
It may be noted that the characteristic feature of the Ahsan form of Talaq is a single pronouncement followed by no revocation during the period of three month’s Iddat. Therefore, where a husband makes any declaration in anger, but realising his mistake afterwards, wants to cancel it, there is sufficient time for him to do so. Single pronouncement of the civil words of Talaq and sufficient opportunity to the spouses for reconciliation, are the two reasons for calling this form as the ‘most proper’ form of Talaq.