Practice Questions For CLAT Subject Legal Aptitude (Worksheet-5)
Legal Aptitude Worksheet-05 With Detail Solutions
This page consist of Legal Aptitude Worksheet-05 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-05
1.Section 11 of the Transfer of Property Act will be applicable only when the interest transferred in the property is
(a) Limited(b) Absolute(c) Both (a) and (b) (d) None of these
2.Which statement is not correct?
(a) Some facts are' relevant but not admissible
(b) Some facts are admissible but not relevant
(c) All relevant facts are admissible
(d) All admissible facts are not relevant
3.Which one of the following Sections of the Indian Penal Code relates to punishment for abetment to commit suicide?
(a) Section 306(b) Section 307(c) Section 308(d) Section 309
4.Which one of the following Provisions of the Indian Penal Code relates to vicarious liability
(a) Section 120 A (b) Section 121 (c) Section 154(d) Section 159
5.In which of the following cases some important principles regarding the defence of unsoundness of mind were propounded?
(a) McNaughten Case(b) RV Prince
(c) RV Dudley and Stephen(d) RV Govinda
6.Order of succession under the Hindu Succession Act of a male Hindu trying intestate is as follows
(a)Agnates, Cognates, Class I heirs, Class II heirs
(b)Cognates, Agnates, Class I heirs, Class II heirs
(c)Class I heirs, Class II heirs, Agnates, Cognates
(d)Class I heirs, Class II heirs. Cognates, Agnates
7.Under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the court can allow to alter or amend the proceedings to
(b) to plaintiff only
(c) to defendant only
(d) to only one defendant, if there are more than one defendant
8.A Muslim mother is entitled to the custody of her female child until she attains
(a) the age of 7 yr (b) puberty (c) age of 11 yr(d) age of 15 yr
9.Which Section of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 was amended in the year 2002?
(a) Section 106 (b) Section 100(c) Section 108 (d) Section 110
10.Transfer of Property Act came into force on
(a)July 01, 1882(b)August 01, 1882
(c)September 01, 1882(d)October 01, 1882
11.In a suit for specific performance, of contract the plaintiff can seek a relief only if he establishes that
(a) prima facie case is in his favour
(b) he was willing and ready to perform his part of the contract
(c) balance of convenience is in his favour
(d) he- may suffer irreparable loss
12.Which one of the following Sections of the Indian Evidence Act says “facts admitted need not be proved'?
(a) Section 18(b) Section 21(v)(c) Section 55(d) Section 58
13.Who amongst the following is an expert under the Indian Evidence Act
(a) hand writing expert(b) finger print expert(c) ballistics expert(d) All of the above
14.The Parliament can restrict or abrogate by law, fundamental rights with respect to
(a) the members of the armed forces
(b) the forces charged with the maintenance of public order
(c) the persons employed in any bureau or other organization established by the state for purpose of intelligence
(d) All of the above
15.Which Section of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides a protection to the members of Armed Forces from arrest?
(a) Section 41 (b) Section 45(c) Section 46 (d) Section 50
16.In case of gift, the done dies before acceptance, then
(a) gift is voidable (b) gift is valid(c) gift is void (d) None of these
17.A mortgage by deposit of title deed is called
(a) Anomalous mortgage(b) English mortgage
(c) Equitable mortgage(d) Usufructuary mortgage
18.The Preamble says that the State in India will assure the dignity of the individual. The Constitution seeks to achieve this object by guaranting
(a) equal Fundamental Rights to each citizen
(b) the right to adequate means of livelihood to each individual
(c) just and humane conditions of work to each individual
(d) equal wages for equal work to each individual irrespective of sex
19.Economic Justice, an important objective of the Constitution of India, is embeded in the
(a) Preamble(b) Preamble and Directive Principles
(c) Directive Principles(d) Fundamental Rights
20.Which one of the following is not correctly matched?
(a) Child witness : Section 118(b) Dumb Witness : Section 120
(c) Hostile witness : Section 154(d) Expert witness : Section 45
21.Under Section 17 of the Indian Evidence Act, the 'admission' is
(a) written only(b) oral only
(c) both Written and oral(d) None of the above
22.Which one of the following Sections of the Indian Penal Code defines ‘affray’?
(a) Section 159 (b) Section 160(c) Section 161 (d)Section 148
23.Which of the following sections of the Code of Civil Procedure defines the ‘Mesne Profit’?
(a) Section 2(4) (b) Section 2(14)(c) Section 2(6) (d) Section 2(12)
24.Dissolution of Muslim marriage by agreement is known as
(a) Talaq in Ahsan (b) Illa(c) Zihar (d) Khula
25.The mortgagors right to redeem the mortgaged property accrues
(a) at any time after the mortgage
(b) at any time after the mortgage money has become due
(c) at any time when the mortgagor wants
(d) at any time mortgagee demands the money
Directions (Q. Nos. 26 to 28): Answer the Questions by application of the following legal principle. Principle When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done, an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy provided that no agreement except an agreement to commit an offence shall amount to a criminal conspiracy unless some act besides the agreement is done by one or more parties to such agreement in pursuance thereof. It is immaterial whether the illegal act is ultimate object of such agreement, or is merely incidental to that object.
26.John, Thomson, Robert, Smith and Chriss entered into an agreement to destroy an office building of the Government of India. John purchased AK-47 rifles and guns and explosive. Thomson supplied vehicles. Robert contributed money. Smith and Chriss made arrangements, conducted meetings and made plans for the commission of the act. John, Thomson and Robert before reaching the office building were apprehended by police and were shot dead. Decide about the offence of Smith and Chriss
(a)Smith and Chris are not guilty of conspiracy as they had not gone in the vehicle for committing crime
(b)liability of Smith and Chriss comes to end with the death of main accused persons viz John, Thomson and Robert
(c)as no offence is committed no one is responsible
(d)Smith and Chris are to be punished as it is immaterial in the criminal law, whether illegal act is ultimate object of the agreement or merely incidental to that object
27.In case of conspiracy, there must be
(a)two or more persons(b)more than one person
(c)Both (a) and (b)(d)Only (b) is correct and (a) is incorrect
28.The gist of the offence of criminal conspiracy is
(a) agreement is necessary between two or more persons to do or cause to be done an illegal act
(b)a legal act by illegal means followed by an overt act to be done or cause to be done according to agreement
(c)Both (a) and (b)
(d)None of the above
Direction : (Q. Nos. 29 to 32)
A. When a State undertakes any measure, the effects of the measure have to be the same for all those who are affected by it.
100 mountaineers embarked on an extremely risky climbing expedition in Leh. Weather conditions worsened five days into the expedition and the mountaineers are trapped under heavy snow. The government received information of this tragedy only two weeks after the unfortunate incident and has only 24 h in which to send rescue helicopters. Weather stations across the world confirm that this particular region of Leh will experience blizzards of unprecedented intensity for almost two weeks after this 24 h window rendering any helicopter activity in the region impossible and certain death for anyone left behind. The government has only five rescue helicopters with a maximum capacity of 50 people (excluding pilots and requisite soldiers) and these helicopters can fly only once in 24 h to such altitudes.
As the Air Force gets ready to send the helicopters, an emergency hearing is convened in the Supreme Court to challenge this measure as this would leave 50 people to die.
29.If you were the judge required to apply Principle A, you would decide that
(a)As many lives must be saved as possible
(b)If everyone cannot be rescued, then everyone must be left behind
(c)A law cannot be upheld at the cost of 50 lives
(d)It must be left to those who are trapped to decide if they want half amongst them to be saved and leave the rest to die
B.When a State undertakes any measure, everyone affected must have an equal chance to benefit from it
30.As the government prepares to send in rescue helicopters, which option would be acceptable only under Principle B and not Principle A
(a)A lottery to choose the 50 survivors excluding those diagnosed with terminal illnesses from participating in the lottery
(b)A lottery to decide the 50 survivors with single parents of children below five years of age automatically qualifying to be rescued
(c)The 50 youngest people should be rescued
(d)None of the above
31.Choosing 50 survivors exclusively by a lottery would be
(a)Permissible under Principle A and B
(b)Impermissible under Principle A and B
(c)Permissible only under Principle B
(d)Permissible only under Principle A
32.If the government decides that it will either save everyone or save none, it would be
(a)Permissible under Principle A and B(b)Impermissible under Principle A and B
(c)Permissible only under Principle A(d)Permissible only under Principle B
33.Principle When two or more persons agree to do or cause to be done, (1) an illegal act or (2) an act which is not illegal by illegal means, through such an agreement such persons are said to have been engaged in a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence. It is said that no consummation of the crime need be achieved or even attempted.
Facts 'X', V and 'Z' plan to kill ‘D’ They agree that only one among them, that is 'Z', will execute the plan. In pursuance of it 'Z' buys a gun and loads it.
(a)Only T can be charged with criminal conspiracy to kill 'D'
(b)All of them, i.e., 'X', T and ‘Z’ can be charged with criminal conspiracy to kill 'D'
(c)'X' and Y cannot be charged with criminal conspiracy to kill 'D'
(d)None of them can be charged with criminal conspiracy to kill 'D'
According to Section 120-A of the Indian Penal Code 1860 When two or more persons agree to do, or cause to be done, an illegal act, or an act which is not illegal by illegal means, such an agreement is designated a criminal conspiracy.
It is immaterial whether the illegal act is the ultimate object of such agreement, or is merely incidental to that object. In the given scenario, all i.e., X, Y and Z can be Charged with criminal conspiracy to kill D.
34. Principle Where there is transfer of ownership of one thing for the ownership of some other thing it is called exchange, while transfer of ownership for consideration of money is called sale, whereas without consideration it becomes gift.
Facts 'A' transfers his house worth Rs. 50 lakh to 'B' for a shopping building worth the same amount, as consideration from 'B'.
(a)The transaction is a gilt
(b)The transaction is a sale
(c)The transaction is an exchange
(d)The transaction is a mortgage
Section 118 of the Transfer of Property Act, states that when two persons mutually transfer the ownership of one thing for the ownership of another, neither thing or both things being money only, the transaction is called an ‘exchange’.
In the given situation, A transfers his house worth Rs. 50 Lakh to B for a shopping building worth the same amount, as consideration from B. So, it is an exchange as there is no money consideration.
35. Principle : No legal remedy exists for an injury caused by an act, for which one has consented.
Facts : The driver of a van with restive horses cried for help, The plaintiff went and attempted to hold the horse but it throw him on the ground causing him injuries, in respect of which he sued the defendant.
(a) The suit is dismissed because the plaintiff must have known that his attempt to hold the horse with the risk
(b) The suit is not dismissed and plaintiff must be compensated because driver cry for help and he is in problem
(c) Plaintiff should be able to recover as the driver failed to take precautions of horse
(d) Plaintiff should not be able to recover as he consented to the risk
36. Principle Acceptance (of offer) must be communicated by the offeree to the offerer so as to give rise to a binding obligation. The expression 'by the offeree to the offerer includes communication between their authorised agents.
Facts X' made an offer to buy Y's property for a stipulated price. 'Y' accepted it and communicated his acceptance to 'Z', a stranger.
Which of the following derivations is correct?
(a)Y's acceptance resulted in an agreement
(b)Y's acceptance did not result in any agreement
(c)Y's acceptance resulted in a contract
(d)Y's acceptance resulted in a promise
According to the principle given in Indian Contract Act, an acceptance must be communicated by the offeree to the offeror, himself or through his authorised agents. But in the given problem, Y accepted the proposal of X and communicated his acceptance to Z who is a stranger and his (Ys) agent. So, Y's acceptance did not result in any agreement.
37.Principle A master is liable for the wrongful acts of his servants committed in the course of employment.
Facts The plaintiff had dispatched hundreds of cannisters full of mustard oil which was manufactured by them and sold under their brand. At the railway station, a few hundred cannisters were seized by the Sanitary Inspector and were loaded in a truck which was used for carrying rubbish and night soil. By this act plaintiff suffered a huge loss because their customers refused to take delivery of the tins on the ground that they had been carried in municipal vehicle .which was used to carry rubbish and night soil and unfit for human consumption.
(a) Sanitary Inspector is liable for his act
(b) Plaintiff cannot succeed because it is duty of Sanitary Inspector to check the quality of oil
(c) Municipality held to be liable because his employees handled the canisters negligently
(d) No anyone liable
38. Principle The consideration or object of an agreement is unlawful if it is forbidden by law. Every agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful is void.
Facts 'X' promises to pay 'Y' Rs. 50000, if he ('Y') commits a crime, 'X' further promises to indemnify him ('Y') against any liability arising thereof. T agrees to act as per X's promise.
Which of the following derivations is correct?
(a)There is a contract between 'X' and Y
(b)There is an agreement between 'X' and 'Y' which can be enforced by the court of law
(c)There is an agreement between X' and 'Y' which cannot be enforced by the court of law
(d)There is a voidable contract between 'X' and ‘Y’
Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act 1872, states that the consideration or object of an agreement is lawful, unless It is forbidden by law; or is of such nature that, if permitted it would defeat the provisions of any law or is fraudulent, of involves implies, injury to the person or property of another, or the court regards it as immoral or opposed to public policy.
In the present scenario, X promises to pay Y Rs. 50000 if he (Y) commits a crime. Here both the object and consideration are unlawful and forbidden by law. So, the agreement between X and Y cannot be enforced by the court of Law.
39.Principle When any person dishonestly takes away moveable property out of the possession of any other person without his consent, he is guilty of theft.
Facts A finds a mobile on the road and he keeps it.
(a) A commit theft because he does not report to owner of the mobile
(b) A does not commit theft because the mobile was not taken away from the possession of any body
(c) A commit theft because he does not report to police
(d) None of the above
40. Principle Whenever there is an invasion of a legal right, the person in whom the right is vested, is entitled to bring an action though he has suffered no actual loss or harm and may recover damages (compensation).
Facts 'A' was a qualified voter for the Lok Sabha election. However, a returning officer wrongfully refused to take A's vote. Inspite of such wrongful refusal, the candidate, for whom 'A' wanted to vote, won the election. But, 'A' brought an action for damages.
Which of the following derivations is correct?
(a)Since, no legal right of 'A had been violated, therefore, as such no compensation could be granted.
(b)Since, legal right of 'A' had been violated, therefore, compensation should be granted.
(c)No, compensation could be granted, as 'A' had suffered no loss as his candidate won the election.
(d)Since, no fundamental right of 'A' had been violated, therefore, as such no compensation could be granted.
According to the Law of Torts, there is a legal maxim 'injuria sine damnum' which means whenever there is an invasion of a legal right, the person in whom the right is vested, is entitled to bring an action though he has suffered no actual harm and may recover damages. It is sufficient to show that there is violation of a legal right and the law will presume damage. In the given scenario, though the candidate for whom A wanted to vote for won the election, but A will succeed in his action for damages, because there is a violation of his legal right.
41.Principle Every person, who is of the age of majority, is competent to contract according to the law to which he is subject.
Facts A minor mortgaged his house in favour of Thakur Das, a money lender, to secure a loan of Rs. 20000. A part of this i.e., Rs. 10500 was actually advanced to him. While considering the proposed advance the attorney who was acting for the money lender, received information that plain tiff was still a minor. Subsequently, the minor commenced an action stating that he was underage when he executed the mortgage and the same should therefore, be cancelled. He prayed for setting aside the mortgage. The mortgage money lender prayed for the refund of Rs. 10500 from the minor.
(a) As a minor‘s contract is void and money advanced to a minor can be recovered
(b) A minor’s contract is void a initio any money advanced to a minor cannot be recovered
(c) A minor’s contract is voidable; any money advanced to a minor can be recovered
(d) Advanced money can be recovered because minor has given wrong information about
42. Principle Negligence is a breach of duty or a failure of one party to exercise the standard of care required by law, resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. A plaintiff can take civil action against the respondent, if the respondent's negligence causes the plaintiff injury or loss of property.
Facts 'D' went to a cafe and ordered and paid for a tin/can of soft drink. The tin was opaque and therefore, the contents could not be seen from outside. She ('D') consumed some of the contents and then lifted the tin to pour the remainder of the content into a tumbler. The remains of a snail in decomposed state dropped out of the tin into the tumbler. 'D', later complained of a stomach pain and her doctor diagnosed her as having gastroenteritis and being in a state of severe shock. She used the manufacturer of the drink for negligence.
Applying the afore-stated principle, which of the following derivations is correct as regards liability of the manufacturer in the given situation?
(a)The manufacturer is liable for negligence, as it owed a duty (to consumers) to take reasonable care to ensure that its products are safe for consumption
(b)The manufacturer is not liable for negligence, as there is no direct contract between ‘D’ and the manufacturer. No duty is owed by the manufacturer towards a particular consumer (‘D’)
(c)The manufacturer is not liable for negligence because it would otherwise become very difficult for the manufacturers to do business
(d)The manufacturer could be made liable under criminal law, but not for tort of negligence
According to the Law of Torts on Negligence, it is the breach of duty on the part of one party to exercise the standard of care required by law, resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. In the given scenario, D will succeed in her claim against the manufacturer, as they are liable for negligence, as It is their duty to take care to ensure that its products are safe for consumption.
43.Such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, and commits such act without any excuse for incurring the risk of causing death or such injury as aforesaid
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 the woolen coat to 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 Cleaners. But since due to the winter, he needs the coats descriptively, he immediately placed the coat near his goods so that he can quickly take it without the knowledge of the drycleaner.
(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 Cleaners
(d)None of the above
44.Principle Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent, moves that property with an intention to take. it is said to commit theft.
Facts Y cuts down a tree on Z’s ground, with the intention of dishonestly taking it out of Z’s possession without Z’s consent. Y could not take away the tree.
(a) Y can be prosecuted for theft
(b) Y cannot be prosecuted for theft
(c) Y can be prosecuted for attempt to theft
(d) Y has neither committed theft nor attempted to commit theft
45.Principle Culpable homicide is murder, if the act by which the death is caused is done with the intention of causing death.
Facts X is in cultivating possession of agricultural land belonging to yZ'. A suit is pending before the court for recovery of the said land. 4X' along with T' intending to kill 'Z' to keep the disputed land in possession, plan and set fire to his house by locking 'Z' from outside just before midnight and by preventing other from coming to his rescue. 'Z' is roasted alive. Decide
(a)‘X’ and ‘Y' guilty of murder
(b)'X' and ‘Y' are not guilty of murder
(c)'X' and ‘Y' are guilty of culpable homicide not, amounting to murder
(d)None of the above
46. Principle No communication made in good faith is an offence by reason of any harm to the person to whom it is made, if it is made for the benefit of that person.
Facts 'A', a surgeon, in good faith, communicates to a patient his opinion that he cannot live. The patient dies in consequence of the shock.
(a) ‘A’ has committed the offence of causing death of his patient
(b)‘A’ has not committed the offence of causing death of his patient
(c)‘A’ has only partially committed the offence of causing death of his patient
(d)None of the above
The principle given here is similar to that enshrined in Section 93 of the Indian penal code, according to which, no communication made in good faith is an offence by reason of any harm to the person to whom it is made, if it is made for the benefit of that person. In the present scenario, A has not committed the offence of causing death of his patient, because he did so in good faith for the benefit of his patient.
47.Principle Proposal (communication) + Acceptance (communication) + Consideration = Contract. The communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made.
Facts X’s nephew absconded from home. He sent his servant in search of the boy. After the servant had left, X by handbills offered to pay Rs. 501 to anybody finding his nephew. The servant came to know of this offer only alter he had already traced the missing child. He, therefore, brought an action to recover the reward.
(a) His .action would fail because he was not aware of the offer
(b) His action would not fail because it was a general offer
(c) The fact that he was not aware of the offer does not make any difference and hence it was a valid contract. It is a mere formality
(d) None of the above
48. Principle Whoever causes death by doing an act with the intention of causing death, or with the intention of causing such bodily injury as is likely to cause death, or with, the knowledge that he is likely by such act to 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, induces 'B' to fire at the bush. 'B' fires and kills ‘Z’
(a)'B' has committed the offence of culpable homicide
(b)'A' has committed the offence of culpable homicide
(c)Both 'A' and 'B' have committed the offence of culpable homicide
(d)None of them has committed the offence of culpable homicide
The principle given here is similar to that enshrined in Section 299 of the Indian penal code which deals with culpable homicide.
Here, A has committed the offence of culpable homicide, however, B is not guilty of any offence because he (B) was not aware that Z is behind the bush.
49. Principle Under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 either the husband or the wife can move a petition for a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion. The term 'desertion' means desertion of the petitioner by the other party to the marriage for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition, without reasonable cause and without the consent or against the wish of such party and includes the willful neglect of the petitioner by the other party to the marriage and its grammatical variations and cognate expressions shall be construed accordingly. It is also said that desertion is withdraw not from a, place but from a state of things.
Facts Rohan, a technocrat, went to US in January 2011 for pursuing his higher studies for a period of three years. In fact, Rohan went to US with the consent of his wife Basanti, who stayed at her parents' home, and with a promise of his return to India upon the completion of his studies. From US he has quite often been in touch with his wife. Subsequently, Rohan has got a job there in US and he wishes to take his wife. She refuses to go to US and, in the meanwhile, she files a petition for a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion by her husband.
(a)Rohan's three year stay in US in the above context can amount to a ground of desertion for divorce
(b)Rohan's three year stay in US in the above context cannot amount to a ground of desertion for divorce
(c)Rohan's continued stay after three years can amount to a ground of desertion for divorce
(d) Basanti's refusal can amount to a ground of desertion for divorce
According to the provisions of Hindu marriage Act 1955, either party can file a petition for a decree of divorce on the ground of desertion provided that desertion has been committed for a period of not less than 2 yr and without the consent of the other party. In the given case Rohan's stay in US for three years cannot amount to a ground of desertion for divorce because he went to US with the consent of his wife.
50. Principle 'Wrongful gain' is gain by unlawful means of property to which the person gaining is not legally entitled. 'Wrongful loss' is the loss by unlawful means of property to which the person losing it is legally entitled.
Facts 'X' takes away Y's watch out of Y's possession, without Y's consent and with the intention of keeping it.
(a)'X' causes 'wrongful gain' to 'Y'(b)'Y' causes 'wrongful gain' to 'X'
(c)'X' causes 'wrongful loss' to ‘Y’(d)T causes 'wrongful loss' to 'X'
Section 23 of the Indian Penal Code, defines 'Wrongful loss', it is the loss by unlawful means of property to which the person losing it is legally entitled. In the given case, as X takes Y's watch out of Y's possession, without his consent and with the intention of retaining it, X causes wrongful loss to Y.
Get free pdf for Legal Aptitude Worksheet-05