Practice Questions For CLAT Subject Legal Aptitude (Worksheet-1)

CLAT

Legal Aptitude Worksheet-01 With Detail Solutions

This page consist of Legal Aptitude Worksheet-01 prepared by experts of Physics Wallah with detail solution.

For more Questions for Legal Aptitude for CLAT check out main page.

Find below Legal Aptitude Worksheet-01

LEGAL APTITUDE

1.Interest republicae . . . . . . Litium.

(a) uexari pro(b) nemo debet(c) ut sit finis(d) Executio non

1.(c)

1.Legal Awareness - Legal Terms – Easy

2.. . . . . . alteram partem.

(a) auctoris(b) audi(c) bona fides(d) bona gestura

2.(b)

2.Legal Awareness - Legal Terms – Easy

3.Assertion (A) A minor can become a partner of a firm.

Reason (R) As Indian Partnership Act provide that minor can be admitted to the benefit of the firm.

(a)Both A and B are true(b)A is the B are false

(c)A is false, B is true(d)Both A and B are false

3.(c)

3.Legal Awareness - Important Indian Acts – Easy

4.Assertion (A) Agreements enforceable by law are contract

Reason (R) Agreements not enforceable by law are void

(a)Both A and R are true(b)A is true R is false

(c)A is false R is true(d)Both A and R are false

4.(b)

4.Legal Awareness - Important Indian Acts – Easy

5.Which of the following is not the function of the international Court of Justice?

(a)Gives advisory opinion at the request of general Assembly

(b)Gives advisory opinion at the request of Security Council

(c)Interprets treaties when considering legal disputes brought before it by nations

(d)Decides International crimes

5.(b)

5.Legal Awareness - Important Treaties and Conventions – Easy

6.Dowry death is incorporated as an offence in the Indian Penal Code under which section of the Indian Penal Code?

(a) 304A(b) 304B(c) 304 Part I(d) 304 Part II

6.(d)

6.Legal Awareness – Constitution – Medium

7.A person who makes an affidavit or deposition is called

(a) plaintiff(b) witness(c) deponent(d) defendant

7.(b)

7.Legal Awareness - Legal Maxims – Easy

8.X, a married woman, agreed to live in adultery with B and also agreed to serve him as his housekeeper. In return, B agreed to pay X Rs.? 500 per month for living in adultery and Rs. 500 per month for housekeeping. The agreement is

(a) valid

(b) void

(d) unlawful as being opposed to public policy

8.(c)

8.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Medium

9.The railway authorities allowed a train to be over crowded. In consequence, a legitimate passenger Mr X got his pocket picked. Choose the appropriate answer.

(a) Mr X can sue the railway authorities for these loss suffered

(b) Mr X cannot sue because he had given his consent to travel in a over-crowded train

(c) Mr X cannot surely railway authorities because ` there was no infringement of his legal right and mere fact that the loss was caused does not give rise to a cause of action

(d) None of the above

9.(a)

9.Legal Awareness - Legal Maxims – Medium

10.Match the schedule I and II and choose the appropriate answer

Schedule ISchedule II

A. Republic1. Head of the state is elected by the people

B. Secular2. State does not recognize any religion

as religion of the state

C. Democracy3. The government which gets authority from the will of the people

ABC ABC

(a)123 (b)132

10.(a)

10.Legal Awareness – Constitution – Medium

Problem 2 (Q. Nos. 11 to 14)

Rules :

A.When land is sold, all 'fixtures' on the land are also deemed to have been sold.

B.If a moveable thing is attached to the land or any building on the land, then it becomes a 'fixture'.

Facts :

Khaleeda wants to sell a plot of land she owns in Baghmara, Meghalaya and the sale value decided for the plot includes the fully-furnished palatial six-bedroom house that she has built on it five years ago. She sells it to Gurpreet for sixty lakh rupees. After completing the sale, she removes the expensive Iranian carpet which used to cover the entire wooden floor of one of the bedrooms. The room had very little light and Khaleeda used this light-coloured radiant carpet to negate some of the darkness in the room. Gurpreet, after moving in, realises this and files a case to recover the carpet from Khaleeda.

11.As a judge you would decide in favour of

(a)Gurpreet because when the price was agreed upon, Khaleeda did not inform her about removing the carpet.

(b)Gurpreet because the carpet was integral to the floor of the bedroom and therefore attached to the building that was sold.

(c)Khaleeda because a fully-furnished house does not entail the buyer to everything in the house

(d)Khaleeda because by virtue of being a carpet it was never permanently fixed to the floor of the building

11.(b)

Assume that in the above fact scenario, Khaleeda no longer wants the carpet. She removes the elaborately carved door to the house after the sale has been concluded and claims that Gurpreet has no claim to the door. The door in question was part of Khaleeda's ancestral home in Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu for more than 150 yr before she had it fitted as the entrance to her Baghmara house.

12.As a judge you would decide in favour of

(a)Khaleeda because while the rest of the building belongs to Khaleeda exclusively, the door is ancestral property and therefore the decision to sell it cannot be Khaleeda's alone

(b)Gurpreet because the door is an integral part of the building as it is attached to it

(c)Khaleeda because the door can be removed from the building and is therefore not attached to it

(d)Gurpreet because the contract is explicitly for the whole house and since the door is part of house, it cannot be removed subsequent to the sale

12.(b)

13.Amongst the following options, the most' relevant consideration while deciding a case on the basis of the above two principles would be

(a)Whether the moveable thing was included in the sale agreement

(b)Whether the moveable thing was merely placed on the land or building

(c)Whether the moveable thing had become an inseparable part of the land or building

(d)Whether the moveable thing could be removed

13.(b)

14.Rule C If a moveable thing is placed on land with the intention that it should become an integral part of the land or any structure on the land it becomes a fixture.

Applying Rules A and C, to the fact situations in Questions 161 and 162, as a judge you would decide in favour of

(a)Khaleeda in both situations(b)Gurpreet only in 161

(c)Khaleeda only in 161(d)Gurpeet in both situations

14.(c)

11-14.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Medium

15.Principle A contract cannot be enforced by or against a person who is not a party to it. However, where some benefit is conferred on third party by the contract itself, there third party can be allowed to enforce that contract to get such benefit.

Facts Dinesh is liable to pay % 50000 to Suresh. In order to discharge this liability Dinesh enters into a contract with Ramesh by which Dinesh sells his car to Ramesh for ? 1 lakh Ramesh takes the delivery of the car and promises/assures to pay its price at the earliest. Dinesh separately informs Suresh about this contract for his satisfaction. Ramesh fails to pay the car's price. Suresh wants to join Dinesh in filing suit against Ramesh for the recovery of price of the car. Whether Suresh is entitled to do so?

(a)Suresh is entitled to do so because the contract was made for his benefit

(b)Suresh is entitled to do so because Dinesh is liable to him and discharge of this liability depends upon the payment of the price of the car by Ramesh

(c)Suresh is not entitled to do so because liability of Dinesh does not depend upon any assurance of Ramesh

(d)Suresh is not entitled to do so because he is not a party to the contract between Dinesh and Ramesh

15.(a)

According to the principle given, a contract cannot be enforced by or against a person who is not a party to it but where benefit is conferred on third party then that third party, can be allowed to enforce that contract. In this scenario, Suresh is entitled to join Dinesh in filing suit against Ramesh for the recovery of price of the car, because Dinesh entered into a contract with Ramesh to sell his car, only for the purpose of discharging his liability.

15.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Difficult

16.Principle : Preparation is not an offence except the preparation of some special offences.

Facts : Rameshwar keeps poisoned halua in his house, wishing to kill Binoy whom he invited to a party and to whom he wishes to give it. Unknown to Rmeshwar, his only son takes the halua and dies. In this case

(a)Rameshwar is liable for the murder.

(b)He is not liable for murder since it is a preparation alone.

(c)He is liable for culpable homicide

(d)He is liable for cheating

16.(b)

16.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Easy

17.Principle : Every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of common object

Fact: A, along with eight others went to a near village to beat some of his enemies. In this fight A was injured. The members of the opposite party ran away. Thereafter A's friends followed the opponents and killed one of them.

(a)A and his companions are liable to be punished for the murder.

(b)Only A is liable, others are liable for minor offences only

(c)No one is liable since they exercised the private defence

(d)None of these

17.(a)

17.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

18.Principle : Voluntary drunkenness is not a Defence under ss.85 and 86 of the Code

Facts: A has in his possession a bottle of poisonous lotion for external application and a bottle of medicine for internal use. A in a drunken condition gives to his child an ounce of the poisonous lotion to drink as result of which the child died. Is A guilty of any offence?

(a)A is guilty of death caused by rash and negligent act.

(b)A is guilty of murder

(c)A is not guilty since he is in a drunken state.

(d)A is guilty of cheating

18.(a)

A cannot take 'drunkenness' as a defence as voluntary drunkenness is not a defence under ss.85 and 86 of the Code.

18.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

19.Principle If a contract is made by post between two persons living in two different cities, then the contract is said to be complete as soon as the letter of acceptance is properly posted and the place of completion of the contract is that city where acceptance is posted. It is worth mentioning here that in every contract there is always an offer from one party and the acceptance of the offer from the other party.

Facts Sani, a resident of Patna, gives an offer by post to sell his house for ^ 25 lakh to Hani, a resident of Allahabad. This offer letter is posted on 1st January, 2013 from Patna and reaches Allahabad on 7th January, 2013. Hani accepts this offer and posts the letter of acceptance on 8th January, 2013 from Allahabad which reaches Patna on 16th January, 2013. But Sani presuming that Hani is not interested in accepting his offer, sells his house to Gani at same price on 15 th of January, 2013. Hani files a suit against Sani for the breach of contract in the competent court of Allahabad. Whether Hani will succeed?

(a)Hani cannot succeed as Sani cannot be compelled by law to wait for the answer from Hani for an indefinite period of time

(b)Hani cannot succeed as he could use some other effective and speedy mode for communicating his acceptance in minimum possible time

(c)Hani can succeed as he properly posted the letter of acceptance and the delay was beyond his control

(d)Hani can succeed as contract became complete in the eyes of law on the date of posting the letter of acceptance

19.(d)

According to the legal principle given in this scenario, the contract is said to be complete as soon as the letter of acceptance is properly posted and the place of completion of the contract is that city where acceptance is posted. In this case, Hani can succeed, because he posted his acceptance the very next day without wasting any time, so the contract became complete in the eyes of law on the date of posting the letter of acceptance.

19.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Difficult

9.Principle : Culpable homicide - Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as cause death, commits the offence of culpable homicide.

Facts : A knows Z to be behind a bush. B does not know it A, intending to cause, or knowing it to be likely to cause Z's death, induced B to fire at the bush. B fires and kills Z. He B may be guilty of no offence; but A has committed the offence of culpable

(a)A does not have intention to cause Z's death

(b)Z was not behind the bush

(c)A has committed the offence of culpable homicide

(d)B does not know .hat A has the intention to cause Z's death

9.(c)

9.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

20.Principle : If in the exercise of the right of private defence against an assault which reasonable causes the apprehension of death, the defender be so situated that he cannot effectually exercise that right without risk of harm to an innocent person his right of private defence extends to the running of that risk.

Facts : A is attacked by a mob who attempt to murder him. He cannot effectually exercise his right of private defence without firing on the mob, and he cannot fire without risk or harming young children who are mingled with the mob, then

(a)‘A’ commits no offence if by so firing he harms any of the children.

(b)‘A’ does not have the right of private defence.

(c)‘A’ cannot use his right of private defence against mob.

(d)‘A’ has the right of private defence.

20.(a)

Section 96 to 106 of the IPC deal with the right of private defence and are a recognition of the right of a person to protect his or her life and property against the unlawful aggression of others. Section 96 of the IPC states that nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence. Section 97 of the IPC defines the right of private defence of the body and property. Every person has a right to defend his own body and the body of any other person against any offence affecting the human body, subject to the restrictions contained in section 99 of the IPC. Among the restrictions stated in section 99 of the IPC, the provision stipulated the extent to which the right of private defence may be exercised, namely that it is no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence. Further, Section 10 details instances in which the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death.

20.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Difficult

21.Principle : Whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceedings beyond certain circumscribing limits, is said "wrongfully to confine" that person.

Facts : A places men with fire arms at the outlets of a building, and tells B that he will fire at B, if B attempts to leave the building.

(a)A is guilty of wrongful restraints

(b)A is guilty of wrongful confinement

(c ) A is not guilty since it is a preparation only.

(d)None of these

21.(b)

21.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Medium

22.Principle He, who goes to the court of law to seek justice, must come with clean hands.

Facts P enters into a contract with S under which S has to construct a house for P and has to complete the same within one year from the date of the contract. This contract includes two very important terms. According to first term, if there is price hike of the materials to be used in the construction, then the escalation charges at a particular rate shall be payable by P to S. According to second term, if the construction of the house is not completed within the period prescribed for it, then S will have to pay penalty at a particular rate to P. Before the completion of the construction work the workers of S go on strike and strike continues up to three months even after the expiry of one year. After that period workers return and the construction work again starts. During the last three months period of strike there was a considerable rise in the price of the building material. S claimed escalation cost from P, P did not agree to it. S filed a suit in the court of law either to order the payment of the price of the building material on the basis of escalated price or to allow him to stop the work without incurring any penal liability towards P.

(a)S will succeed as strike by his workers was unexpected and beyond his control

(b)S can succeed as there is an escalation clause in the contract

(c)S cannot succeed as he has failed to complete the construction work in time and strike can not be treated as a valid excuse for delay in work

(d)S can succeed, if he pays penalty to P for delay

22.(c)

In this case, S wil not succeed because there was an express condition in the contract that if the construction of the house is not completed within the period prescribed for it, then he will be liable to pay penalty to P. ] n this case, according to the principle, one who goes to the court of law to seek justice, must come with clean hands, however here S himself is at fault because he could not construct the house within g ven time frame, so he will not succeed.

22.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Difficult

23.Principle : Whoever being in any member in rusted with the property or with any dominion ever property dishonestly misappropriates or comments to his own use that property or dishonesty uses or disposes of that property in violation any direction of law presenting the mode in which such trust is to be discharged or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust or willfully suffers any other person so to do, commits “Criminal bread of trust”.

Facts : In the above principle facts and Mr. ‘X’ an trader to his servant / employee ‘Z’ to whom trader fails to pay salary for 6 months a sum of Rs. 100000 to be deposited walk the bark in a particular account number but ‘Z’ in stand of depositing the some in the traders account run away with the money dishonestly, Here

(a)‘Z’ is not guilty of one offence as trader use money to him.

(b)‘Z’ is guilty of thought.

(c)‘Z’ is guilty of thought.

(d)‘Z’ is guilty of forgery.

23.(b)

23.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

24.Principle : Whoever dishonestly induce any person, by putting him in fear of injury to that person or any other person, to deliver any property or valuable security to that or any person or to signed or sealed anything which may be converted into a valuable security commits extortion.

Facts : Sunil, a bad character of locality commonly known as ‘Sunil Bhai’ enter into the shop of a trader and asked him whether he want to live or not, it yes then send a sum of Rs. 100000 to him at his place with any paid and consequently the trader send the money. Here, Sunil has committed

(a)no offence (b)attempt to extortion

(c)extortion (d)trespass

24.(c)

Section 393 of IPC defines the extortion. Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any person any property or valuable security or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security, commits ‘extortion’.

24.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

25.Principle: Whoever intentionally puts any person in fear of any injury to that person, or to any other, and thereby dishonestly induces the person so put in fear to deliver to any property or valuable security, or anything signed or sealed which may be converted into a valuable security, commits "extortion".

Facts : A threatens to publish a defamatory libel concerning B unless B gives Rs.5 lakhS. A induces B to give money.

(a)A is guilty of defamation

(b)A is guilty of extortion

(c ) A is not guilty since it is a preparation only.

(d)None of these

25.(b)

25.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

26.Principle : Attempt to murder is punishable under S.307 IPC but preparation is not an offence.

Facts : A mixes sugar, thinking that it was poison in the tea meant for B with an intention to cause his death. What offence, if any, has been committed by A?

(a)A is not liable to be punished for any offence. 'A' has done only preparation, for the commission of crime.

(b)A is liable for attempt to murder

(c)He is guilty of criminal conspiracy

(d)He is guilty of cheating

26.(a)

26.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Easy

27. Principle : Nothing which is not intended to cause death, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to cause, or be known by the doer to be likely to cause, to any person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, and who has given a consent, whether express or implied, to suffer that harm, or to take the risk of that harm

Facts : A fake doctor operated on a man for internal piles by cutting them out with an ordinary knife. The man died of haemorrahage.

(a)Doctor is guilty of murder

(b)Doctor is not guilty

(c)Doctor is guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder

(d)Doctor is guilty of defamation

27.(c)

He exercised his right of private defence under a mistake of fact. He was under the belief that A and B were fighting. He is justified in exercising his right of private defence.

27.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

28.Principle: A person cannot complain against a harm to which he has voluntarily consented. Precautions can be taken only against reasonably foreseeable mishaps.

Fact: At an athletic meet, during a hammer throw, the hammer came apart and hit a middle distance runner who was sitting 10 meters outside the throwing area. The runner sustained severe injuries on the head and neck. The runner filed a suit for damages. The standard precautions were taken for throwing the seven kilogram hammer.

(I)Would be able to recover because the organizers had failed to keep the equipment in good condition.

(II)Would not be able to recover because the injuries were caused in a freak accident.

(III)Would not be able to recover because she had agreed to participate in the sports meet with all the attendant risks

(IV)Would not be able to recover because the accident was not reasonably foreseeable.

(a)I(b)II and III(c)III(d)II, III and IV

28.(d)

Options (ii). (iii) and (iv) conform to the legal principle set out in the given problem. hence. 'd' is the right choice.

28.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

29.Principle : Culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death.

Facts : ‘A’ shoots ‘Z’ with the intention of killing him ‘Z’ dies in consequence

Explain :

(a)‘A’ commits murder

(b)It is culpable homicide

(c)The offence committed by ‘A’, is culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

(d)‘A’ has no intention.

29.(a)

Section 300 of IPC defines the murder.

29.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Easy

30.Principle : Whoever being in any member in rusted with the property or with any dominion ever property dishonestly misappropriates or comments to his own use that property or dishonesty uses or disposes of that property in violation any direction of law presenting the mode in which such trust is to be discharged or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust or willfully suffers any other person so to do, commits “Criminal bread of trust”.

Facts : Mr. Rohan Malhotra was appointed as executor of the will of the dueased person. He was band by law to distributes the person. He was band by law to distributes the property of the deceased according to the division of the will, But Mr. Rohan Malhotra dishonestly appropriates the properties of his own use. Here, Mr. Rohan Malhotra is

(a)guilty of criminal breach of trust.

(b)guilty as he has not entrusted with any property.

(c)guilty of attempt to cheat.

(d)not guilty of any offence as he has lien over the properties of deceased as deceased fail to pay him as old debt.

30.(a)

30.Legal Reasoning – Criminal Law – Medium

31.Principle : Whoever intending to take dishonestly any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property in order to such taking is said to commit theft.

Facts : ‘A’ found a motorcycle with ignition key plugged in which the owner has parked at the read side and forget to take ignition key with him. ‘A’ on seeing that motorcycle with the intention of having a ride for his pleasure took away the motorcycle, Here

(a)‘A’ is guilty of theft.

(b)‘A’ is guilty of extortion.

(c)‘A’ is guilty of attempt to commit theft.

(d)‘A’ is guilty of no offence as he did not do anything dishonestly.

31.(d)

31.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

32.Principle : The communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made, if an offer has not yet been communicated, even if somebody acts according to the terms of the offer, he cannot be deemed to be acceptor of that offer.

Facts : ‘A’s nephew was missing. ‘A’ sent his servants in search of the boy. When the servants had left, ‘A’ by handbill offered to pay Rs. 5000 to anybody discovering the boy. One of his servant ‘B’ who had knowledge about this reward, discovered the boy and claimed the reward. Is ‘B’ is liable to claim the reward?

(a)Yes ‘B’ is liable to claim the reward because he had knowledge about the offer and reward.

(b)No, ‘B’ cannot claim the reward.

(c)No, ‘B’ cannot claim the reward because he is servant of ‘A’.

(d)None of these

32.(a)

32.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Medium

33. Principle : Agreement void the - Where both the parties to an agreement are under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement the agreement is void.

Explanation - An erroneous opinion as to the value of the thing which forms the subject-matter of the agreement is not to be deemed a mistake as to a matter of fact.

Facts : A agrees to sell to B a specific of goods supposed to be on its way from England to Bombay. It turns out that, before the day of the bargain the ship conveying the cargo had been cast away and the goods lost. Neither party was aware of these facts. The agreement is void.

Where both the parties are under mistake as to matter of fact, the contract under Section 20 is

(a) voidable(b) void(c) valid(d) illegal

33.(b)

33.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Easy

34.Principle: By virtue of s. 330 of the Code, if a person voluntarily causes hurt for the purpose of extorting confession from the sufferer or any information which may lead to the detection of an offence, he shall be punishable with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine.

Facts : X, a police officer tortures Y, to tell him where the stolen property was kept by him. Has A committed any offence?

(a)X is not liable since he is discharging his duty.

(b)X is liable since the custodial torture is not part of duty

(c)X is not liable since the torture was to extract confession.

(d)None of these

34.(b)

34.Legal Reasoning - Law of Torts – Medium

35.Principle : If the offer and acceptance is communicated through telephone, the contract is complete only when the acceptance is received (clearly heard and understood) by the offer. A contract is deemed to be made at the time and the place where acceptance is received or heard.

Fact : ‘A’ a stock broker in Delhi made an offer by telephone to a stock broker ‘B’ in Mumbai, who (B) immediately accepted the offer by telephone. But because of some technical fault ‘A’ did not hear the voice of ‘B’ is there a contract between ‘A’ and ‘B’

(a)Yes, there is offer and acceptance of offer.

(b)No, the communication did not complete because ‘A’ did not hear the acceptance of ‘B’.

(c)Yes, because ‘B’ accepted the offer of ‘A’.

(d)Yes, there is no offer.

35.(b)

It is only after the acceptance of the proposal that a contract between the two parties can arise. Section 2(b) of Indian Contract Act, 1872 defines ‘acceptance’ as, ‘When the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereof, the proposal is said to be accepted. A proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise. Thus acceptance is the assent given to a proposal.

35.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Medium

36.Principle: A master shall be liable for the fraudulent acts committed by his servants in the course of employment.

Fact: Shaila Devi opened a S.B.Account with Oriental Bank, and a cousin of her by name Mohan, who was a clerk in that Bank, helped her to complete the formalities. Subsequently she used to entrust whatever money she was getting to Mohan along with her passbook and Mohan used to return the passbook with relevant entries. One day Shaila Devi discovered that Mohan, instead of crediting the money to her account, had misappropriating he made it and the entries in the passbook without authorization. Shaila Devi seeks compensation from Oriental Bank.

(a)Oriental Bank shall be liable because Mohan was acting in the course of employment.

(b)Oriental Bank shall not be liable, because Mohan was not acting in the course of employment.

(c)Oriental Bank was not liable, because Shaila Devi was negligent.

(d)None of the above

36.(b)

Shaila Devi will not succeed against the Bank because. Mohan while collecting the money from her acted in the capacity of her cousin rather than on behalf of the bank.

36.Legal Reasoning - Law of Torts – Medium

37.Principle : Whoever being in any member in rusted with the property or with any dominion ever property dishonestly misappropriates or comments to his own use that property or dishonesty uses or disposes of that property in violation any direction of law presenting the mode in which such trust is to be discharged or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust or willfully suffers any other person so to do, commits “Criminal bread of trust”.

Facts : Rohit Kumar is employed in a collection agency of HDFC Bank for whose behalf they are collection payments from the defaulters. Mr. Rohit Kumar was authorized to allow payment up to Rs. 2500 on issuing proper receipt on which the said fact is mentioned. Rohit Kumar having receipt book with him gone to collect the payment from a defaulter cashier and collect Rs. 75000 from him and run away, here

(a)Rohti kumar is not guilty offence as the payer himself should have been couscous while making payment.

(b)Rohit Kumar is guilty of fraud as he collect and issued receipt more than the want of which he is authorized to collect.

(c)Rohit Kumar is guility of criminal breach of trust as he collect money on behalf of the HDFC Bank and run away.

(d)Rohit Kumar is guilty of no offence.

37.(c)

37.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law - Medium

38.Principle : Theft is the dishonest moving of property with the intention of taking it out for the person's possession without his consent.

Facts : A gives his woolen coat to a dry cleaner along with his wife's sarees for the purpose of dry cleaning. He is told to collect the clothes after two days. When he comes after two days, he finds that he does not have enough money to pay to the dry cleaner. But since due to the winter, he needs the coat desperately, he surreptitiously places the coat near his other goods so that he can quietly take it without the knowledge of the dry cleaner

(a)A is guilty of theft

(b)A is not guilty of theft

(c)A is not guilty of theft but has to pay compensation to the dry cleaner

(d)None of the above

38.(c)

38.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

39.Principle : Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act or that he is doing what is either wrong or contrary to law.

Facts : ‘X’ is change for an offence and Mr. ‘X’ is conceited, odd, irascible and his brain is not quite all right, or that the physical and mental ailment from which committed certain unusual acts in the past here.

(a)Does the act committed by Mr. X is an offence.

(b)Acts were committed by Mr. X in such a state of minding which he could not understand the nature and as such he is guilty of no offence.

(c)Does the above mental state of X would save him from conviction.

(d)Mental state of X would not be sufficient to get protection of the above principle.

39.(d)

Section 84 of the IPC lays down the test of responsibility in cases of alleged unsoundness of mind. There is no definition of ‘Unsoundness of mind’ under the IPC. However, courts have treated this term as being equivalent to insanity. Insanity itself, however, has no precise definition and is a term used to describe varying degrees of mental disorder. Therefore, every person suffering from some sort of a mental ailment is not ipso facto exempted from criminal responsibility and thereby come within the ambit of the protection provided by section 84 of the IPC.

39.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Medium

40.Principle : Whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Facts: A finds a diamond ring, not knowing to whom it belongs. He sells it immediately to a jeweller.

(a)A is guilty of Criminal Misappropriation.

(b)A is not guilty of Criminal Misappropriation

(c)A is guilty of cheating

(d)None of these

40.(a)

40.Legal Reasoning - Criminal Law – Easy

41.Principle If the object of an agreement is or becomes unlawful or immoral or opposed to public policy in the eyes of law, then the courts will not enforce such agreements. Law generally prohibits child labour.

Facts P enters into an agreement with T, by which P has to let his house to T for two years and T has to pay Rs. 20000.00 per month to P as rent. T starts a child care centre in that house. But after some time in order to earn some money for the maintenance of the centre, T starts sending the children of the centre on the rotation basis to work for four hour a day in some nearby chemical and hazardous factor es. When P comes to know about this new development, he asks T either to stop the children from working in factories or to leave his house immediately. T neither agrees to leave the house nor to stop the children from working in the factories. P files a suit in the court of law for appropriate relief/action.

(a)P cannot succeed as he agreement was for the two years and it cannot be terminated before the expiry of that period.

(b)P cannot succeed as the object at the time of making of the agreement was not clear

(c)P will succeed as the object of the agreement has become unlawful

(d)P will not succeed, if T agrees to share the wages of the children with P

41.(c)

According to the pr inciple given here, if the object of an agreement is or becomes unlawful, then courts will not enforce such agreements, moreover law prohibits child labour. In the present scenario, in the beginning T starts a child care centre in the premises of P, for which he is paying rent but after some time T engages children in a chemical and hazardous factory, which is against the provisions of law, hence the object has become unlawful.

41.Legal Reasoning – Contract Law – Difficult

42.Principle : An intention to create legal relation is essential, in order to create a contract.

Facts : A promise to his two children that he will purchase for then a Matiz car and an Indica car in case they stand first in the ensuing examinations. Both the children stood first in their respective classes. A, however refuses to purchase the cars as promised by him.

(a)Children can sue A in the Court of Law for breach of contract.

(b)Children can sue A in the Court of Law for breach of trust.

(c)Children cannot sue A in the Court of Law for the breach of contract, as there is not an agreement enforceable by law.

(d)Children can sue A in the Court of Law for beach of agreement.

42.(c)

Because there is no express intention of creating legal relation.

42.Legal Reasoning – Contract Law – Medium

Directions (Q. Nos. 43 to 46) : The following questions are based on this legal principle.

Legal Principle Section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act 1932 defines 'Partnership' as 'Partnership' is the relation between person who has agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all.

43.What are the minimum requirements of a partnership?

(a)agreement to form a partnership

(b)agreement to share the profits of a business

(c)The business must be carried on by all the partners or any of them acting for all

(d)All of the above

43.(d)

44.'Partnership' as a term has been defined under

(a) Section 3(b) Section 6(c) Section 4(d) Section 5

44.(c)

45.'Any two or more persons can join together for creating Partnership' it has been defined under

(a)Section 10 of the Companies Act, 1956

(b)Section 11 of the Companies Act, 1956

(c)Section 9 of the Companies Act, 1956

(d)Section 6 of the Companies Act, 1956

"Section 5 of the partnership Act provides that the relation of partnership arises from contract and not from status".

45.(b)

46.'Relation of Partnership arises from contract, not from status' defines under

(a) Section 4(b) Section 5(c) Section 6(d) Section 7

46.(c)

43-46.Legal Awareness - Important Indian Acts – Medium

47.Principle : Same as stated in the general offer.

Facts : A professor of law, announced in his class a reward of Rs. 6000 to any student securing the highest marks in a particular subject, ‘S’ a student, worked very hard and got the highest marks and claimed the reward. The professor however, refuses to give the reward, is professor’s decision is legally right?

(a)Yes, because there was no legal obliagations.

(b)No, ‘S’ can claim the reward because it was a general offer and he fulfil the condition.

(c)Yes, professor can refuse to give the reward to ‘S’.

(d)None of these

47.(b)

General offer is made to the public or world at large. And the contract is made only with that person who comes forward and performs the conditions of the proposal as such performance amounts to acceptance of performance. The communication of acceptance is not necessary.

47.Legal Reasoning - Contract Law – Medium

48.Principle Whosoever by his act or omission causes environmental pollution shall be held liable for any loss caused by such pollution. It shall be no defence in such cases that all due diligence or reasonable care was taken while carrying out the act or omission in question.

Facts Hari is carrying on a chemical and fertiliser industry near a bank of a river. In order to prevent and control any kind of harm to the environment, suitable waste treatment and disposal plants were installed in the factory. Due to some sudden mechanical/ technical problem, these plants ceased to work properly and therefore, caused environmental pollution, which ultimately caused substantial harm to the environment and to the people living around the factory. Victims of such pollution file a suit for suitable remedy.

(a)Victims cannot succeed as necessary precautions to prevent any harm were taken by Hari

(b)Victims cannot succeed as the mechanical/technical problem was sudden and therefore, beyond the control of Hari

(c)Victims can succeed as it is the duty of Hari to see that no harm is caused to the environment/people due to his activity under any circumstances

(d)Victims could succeed, if treatment/disposal plant were not installed in the factory

48.(c)

According to the principle, whosoever causes environmental pollution shall be liable for any loss caused by such pollution and' it shall be no defence that all due diligence and reasonable care was taken. In this case, victims will succeed because it was Hari's duty and responsibility to ensure that no harm is caused to the environment due to his activity under any circumstances.

48.Legal Reasoning - Law of Torts – Difficulty

49.Identification parade is relevant under

(a)Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act

(b)Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act

(c)Section 10 of the Indian Evidence Act

(d)Section 11 of the Indian Evidence Act

49.(b)

49.Legal Awareness – Constitution – Medium

50.In which of the following cases would the specific performance of any contract not be enforced by the Court?

(a)Where the property is not an ordinary article of commerce

(b)Where the property consists of goods which are not easily obtainable in the market

(c)Where compensation in money can be afforded for non-performance of the contract as an adequate relief