CLAThacker

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.

PRINCIPLE
:-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
fact
(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: 7043

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

ya @gopika if the FACT is given that before marriage SUBODH knows that he has epilepsi...then the answer could be ii or iv but fact is not cleared that whether he knows or not that he has epilepsi..he might hav discovered at that moment that he has epilepsi......
Problem 1
Principle:every agreement by which any party thereto is restricted absolutely from enforcing his right under or in respect of any contract,by the legal proceeding in the ordinary tribunals,or which limits the time with in which he may thus enforce his rights is void to that extent
FACT: Bibin was a supplier of of oil based in Bangalore, and ligin was a oil trader located in Hyderabad.bibin and ligin enter in to an agreement for the sale and purchase of oil,which provided that any dispute under or in respect of their agreement would be subject exclusively to the jurisdiction of courts in Hyderabad.In ordinary circumstances the courts in Bangalore and Hyderabad would both have jurisdiction in the matter .when a dispute arose between them ligin brought the matter before the courts in Hyderabad ,and bibin raised the plea that the agreement was void??
i Yes, since it prevent Bibin from proceeding in Bangalore.
ii Yes, since it restricts bibin absolutely from enforcing his right in courts in banglore.
iii No, since it does not restrict bibin absolutely from enforcing his right -he can still approach the courts in Hyderabad .
iv no ,since bibin had willingly entered into it.

PROBLEM 2
FACT:-
Buta singh a farmer comes to know that the roots of senthila herb has a unique healing properties .He applies the paste of the roots of the said herb to many persons and their wounds were cured .He even experimented it on animals and found that applying the roots senthila cured many serious sores on the bodies of cows .He applies for the grant of patent for inviting senthila as a herbal medicine.
PRINCIPLE:- A patent is granted to the inventor for exclusive commercial use of his invention .A Patent is granted only if the thing invented is novel, non obvious and industrially useful.

i Buta singh would get a patent because he has invented something ,which is novel and industrially useful.
ii Buta singh would not get a patent because herbal products are not patented .
iii Buta singh would get a patent because he has experimented in finding healing properties of senthila on men and animals
iv Buta singh would not get a patent because his research is not novel and obvious
tanmayee As i think your First problem answer Should be 3 And 2nd Problem answer should be 3rd.....
BT y not (d) in problem 1 and i think in 2nd problem it will not be 3rd ...any ways plzzz justify ur answers with explanation...
since the answer has to be in strict accordance with the principle given,my answers would be
1.(iii)because there is no absolute restriction on bibin,the agreement's not void,& he can clarify his views in the hyderabad courts as well..
2.(iii)senthila herbs might have existed for numerous years but the farmer was the first to discover its medicinal properties,& since the idea was not obvious,novel & industrially useful,he'll get the patent....
Ok D is not answer of Ist problem because Answer 3rd Fit to the principal and agreemnet is not prohibiting to bibin from enforcing his right.....He has still opportunity to go for decided jury....now look you make agreement that no one will go to court if any disspute arise.....now party has agreed willingy but its void agreement..go with a option which give you a batter explaination..

for your 2nd problem i am thinking tht answer is either 3rd or none of these........br/>

tanmayee sahoo said:
BT y not (d) in problem 1 and i think in 2nd problem it will not be 3rd ...any ways plzzz justify ur answers with explanation...
by @mayank the answer to problem 1 is (d) in the book...thats way a bit confused....
the answer to the first problem is that the agreement is void as it restricts the jurisdiction of one court. people can not restrict jurisdiction of a court by agreement.

for the second problem, patent can not be obtained as what has been done is not an innovation, it is a discovery. discovery is not novel. it can not be patented.


in both questions the principles are a bit faulty - not enough to reach the right answer without leaving scope for doubt. Which book are these from?
rinciple: In order to declare President’s Rule in a particular State, the President of India shall seek a report from the Governor, and decide on the basis of such report. The Governor shall base this report on his analysis and judgement of the situation. The report of the Governor is amenable to judicial review only if it is mala fide.

Facts: Following sporadic riots on a large scale in the state of Chaupatrashtra, the ruling party at the Centre wanted to clamp President’s Rule in the State. However, the party which was in the Opposition at the Centre vehemently opposed it. The same party was also the ruling party in the State of Chaupatrashtra. The Governor of Chaupatrashtra, in his report, stated that the situation looked difficult, but there was no urgent need for President’s Rule. Still, the Centre goes ahead, and President’s Rule is declared. The ruling party in Chaupatrashtra approached the Supreme Court against the imposition of President’s Rule, claiming it was based on irrelevant,
a) will the governor's report be quashed or not and why?
governor report? why should that be quashed? Do u mean whether presidents rule will be quashed?
tHE OPTIONS FOR THE QUESTION ARE
A)The Governor’s report was totally bona fide, and anyway, the basis of such report cannot be challenged in a Court of law.
B) The Governor’s report would be quashed and held as ultra vires the Constitution.
C)The Governor’s report would be quashed, since it was prepared with a dishonest intention.
D) The imposition of President’s Rule would be quashed, since it was done out of purely political vendetta.
The answer is given as c but i cannot understand how it came about

Reply to Discussion

RSS

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!

Members

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Do you like CLAThacker?

© 2018   Created by Ramanuj Mukherjee.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service