don't just crack CLAT, come hack CLAT with us.

legal reasoning doubts - get your doubt resolved on this thread

the following questions have been asked by Tanmayee Sahoo...see if any of you can answer these questions.

1.  subodh and manjeet hav been friends for long time .Manjeet, Who resides abroad ,comes down to see sobodh and the two agree to get married .just before the ceremony
Manjeet discover that  subodh suffers from EPILEPSY .she seeks to avoid
the contract on the basis of fraud.

:-a person actively conceals a fact having knowledge of the fact ,with the intation to deceive or to induce a
person to enter into a contract is said to hav committed FRAUD.

(i)subodh has committed Fraud because he has not informe Manjeet of a material fact.
(ii)Subodh has committed fraud -manjeet being his friend and trusting
him to give the picture creates a duty on subodh 's part to disclose all
(iii)subodh has not committed fraud because manjeeet shud hav taken care to ensure that subodh was healthy
(iv) subodh has   not committed  fraud because there was no active concealment on his part.

2. krishna and arjuna are arch enemies .once when arjuna's house is robbed
,he lodges  a criminal complaint reporting the same and in ordered to
take revenge and cause harm to krishna ,says that krishna is guilty of
the same .The police arrested krishna, investigates  the complaint and
makes a report to the  magistrate stating that krishna is not connected
with the crime .which results in the magistrate discharging krishna
.krishna sues arjuna for the tort of malicious procecution.

PRINCIPLE:-a person who institute a procecution against someone with out any reasonable cause for the same ,with a malicious intentation 
,is guilty of tort of malicuious procecution

(i) arjuna is guilty beause he made the complaint only to seek revenge against Krishna
(ii) arjuna is  guilty  because he didnt check before complaining that krishna was guilty of theft
(iii) arjuna is not guilty because krishna has not been procecuted .
(iv)none of the above

 thanking you

Views: 7432

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I dont know the source, i copy pasted it from clat agla

Ramanuj Mukherjee said:
i think a is the best answer given all the options here. where did u find this question?

Anindhya Shrivastava said:

ans given is D


may be coz it is written in the principle that is an pious obligation and not legal obligation.
Divya said:

its c)

Anindhya Shrivastava said:
Tulsidas borrows Rs 50,000 in cash from his close friend Soordas as an
interest-free loan to be returned within six months. Since the
transaction is between close friends, there is nothing in writing.
Tulsidas dies in a car accident before making the payment. Soordas
informs Ghanshyamdas, the only son of Tulsidas, about the loan, which is
due for repayment after a week. Ghanshyamdas denies any knowledge of
the loan. Is Ghanshyamdas liable to repay the loan?

Principle : The son who inherits his father?s properties is under a pious obligation to repay his loans, if any.

A) Ghanshyamdas has an obligation to pay up as he is the heir to all his
father?s properties. He cannot take just own his father?s assets and
disown his liabilities.

B) Under the doctrine of pious obligation, the son has a sacred obligation to honour his father?s debt.

C) If Soordas is able to prove the loan transaction, Ghanshyamadas has the obligation to pay.

D) Since there was neither anything in writing nor was Ghanshyamdas a
party to the loan transaction, he has no legal liability to pay.
its d) none of the anybdy explain it?

Rishabh A. Gupta said:
i guess (A)

Divya said:

Sir, may please Answer


Principal : Specific performance can not be ordered in case involving personal skills.


Problem : Dr Arvind, a heart specialist enters in to contract with Mr. Bhati that he will operate his father but subsequently he denies. Mr Bhati files the suit for the specific performance. Will He succeed ?


(a)    Mr Bhati will succeed in his suit because non specific performance wud not be adequate remedy for breach of operation contract.

(b)   Mr. Bhati will succeed only if he is not able to arrange alternate doctor for operation.

(c)    Mr. Bhati will not succeed idf he file the case without making any effort to find an alternate to doctor Arving

(d)   None of the above

this should be a as this is a service where personal skills matter. you want to go to a doctor with special skills.
bt sir i want to know that  wether the given principle here is right or not? becoz in the matter of personal skills we can sue the person of personal skill for not performing his part of function under the contract.for example:A comes under contract with B to make a painting for B.but afterwards A send his junior artist for the B can sue A for not performing his part under the contract. bt sir in the above ques the principle is given that specific performance can not b ordered in case involving presonal skills.???dose'nt understand?:-(
Ramanuj Mukherjee said:
this should be a as this is a service where personal skills matter. you want to go to a doctor with special skills.
A is in a house which is on fire, with Z, a child. People below hold out
a blanket. A drops the child from the housetop, knowing it to be likely
that the fall may kill the a guilty if the child dies
no, A has not committed any offence.becoz private defence to one's body or property is no offence.

Anindhya Shrivastava said:
A is in a house which is on fire, with Z, a child. People below hold out
a blanket. A drops the child from the housetop, knowing it to be likely
that the fall may kill the a guilty if the child dies
sir i think its b) becoz b) option is acco. to the principle.

Ramanuj Mukherjee said:

tanmayee sahoo said:
A  contract induced by using undue influence is voidable under Indian Contract Act.

Rajaram after completing his M.B.B.S got admission for his M.D degree in
Cambridge academy of Medical of the condition was that
rajaram shall serve for two year as a tutor in the academy after
completing his study, for a monthly salary of Rs 5000/-, the course was
quite expensive and by the time of completion rajaram found himself in a
financial distress .therefore  he took a well paying job in a private
hospital.when the academy filed a suit against him for the breach of
contract ,rajaram argued that he is entitled to avoid a contract induced
by undue influence.
1.Rajaram will succeed ,since the academy simply exploited his vulnerability to insert the condition of service
2. Cambridge academy used its superior bargaining position t insert an unfair condition.
3.rajaram and Cambridge academy being two independent parties the academy cannot
be said to dominate Rajaram and thereby to induce him to enter in to a
well dis cum under d category of" act done in order 2 avoid another harm"

Anindhya Shrivastava said:
A is in a house which is on fire, with Z, a child. People below hold out
a blanket. A drops the child from the housetop, knowing it to be likely
that the fall may kill the a guilty if the child dies

principle:time is essence of a contract

facts:Aggarwal is the the oldest and most reputed sweer-shop in Delhi.It requires large quantities of sugar for making sweers.Aggarwal plans to sell some new unique and delicious items of sweerts on the eve of new year ,2011.Therefore it places an order to M/s. XYZ Sugar Co.,Ghaziabad, for supply of 2,000 tonnes of top quality sugar.But, it does not receive the sugar till 1st of January, 2011 . The consignment of sugar does reach the sweets-shop, but on 5th of January, 2011.Due to delay in supply of sugar,Aggarwal incurs heavy losses in business.

a>Aggarwal can claim damages from M/s, xyz sugar co,,ghaziabad.

b>aggarwal can not claim damages from M/s. xyz sugar co,bcz the comply ded supply the sugar and performed the contract

c>both the parties canclaim damages from each other because both the parties incurred losses.

d>none of the parties is entitled to damages because the contract was not clear.

i have a doubt here:

i wud go wid a) if i m caught in such a ques in exam.. bt the doubt is;;

Aggarwal plans..  so which date was given 2 xyz or not.. i am not clear ,,, in that case d) option may attract me....

but in extreme gun pointing case i wud go wid a) if in exam..

but y not d)??????

option (a) is right. (d) is vague and (c) is a crazy option, so they are outright eliminated. Now, if it was an ordinary contract for supply of sugar to a sweetshop, (b) would have been right, but since the shop clearly tried to capitalize on the splurge of sales on new year eve, therefore timely performance was needed for commercial reasons. hence i go with (a).

Fact: A handed over rs 5,000 to her neighbour B, who was an employee of the bank and asked him to deposit the money in her account. Instead of doing so, B spent the money. A sues the bank.
a) Bank will be liable since B was its employee.
b) Bank will not be liable as A gave money to B in the capacity of a neighbour and not as the employee of the bank.
c) Bank will not be liable since B wasn't authorised to collect the money from A.
d) Bank will not be liable since this is a criminal act and requires the state to present the case.

principle- A master is liable to third persons for every such wrong of his servant as committed in the course of service. For acts committed beyond scope of employment, the master is liable only if he authorised the act.

according to me the answer should be c but the answer given was b

Reply to Discussion


Have Your Doubts Cleared!

It is never good to have doubts in your mind! Just ask a questions and the super intelligent CLAThackers, many of whom are writing CLAT this time and others who have cleared it already will answer your questions!

If you have doubts on logical reasoning or critical reasoning, ask here.

Legal reasoning doubts are answered on this thread!

Want to ask a GK question? try this thread!



  • Add Photos
  • View All

Do you like CLAThacker?

© 2019   Created by Ramanuj Mukherjee.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service