MCQ 02 April 2025

Daily MCQs for Judiciary Prelims Exams - (02 April 2025)



Question/ Answer
Question1:- Under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, which of the following statements is correct regarding an agreement in restraint of marriage?
  • A) It is void only if it restrains the marriage of a minor.
  • B) It is valid if it restrains second marriage after divorce.
  • C) It is void irrespective of whether the restraint is partial or absolute.
  • D) It is valid if made with the consent of both parties.
Answer is c is correct. Explanation: According to Section 26 of the Indian Contract Act, every agreement in restraint of the marriage of any person, other than a minor, is void. The restraint can be complete or partial—both are equally void in the eyes of law. The law upholds personal liberty, and marriage is a fundamental right. Therefore, any contractual term that restricts marriage is unenforceable.
Question2:- Which of the following correctly compares the rules of succession under Section 8 and Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956?
  • A) Both Section 8 and Section 15 give preference to agnates over Class I heirs.
  • B) Under Section 8, property of a male Hindu devolves to his husband's heirs, whereas under Section 15, property of a female Hindu devolves to her father’s heirs.
  • C) Section 8 gives first preference to Class I heirs, while Section 15 gives preference to the husband and children of the deceased female.
  • D) Section 8 and Section 15 provide identical lines of succession for male and female Hindus.
Answer is c is correct. Explanation: • Section 8: When a male Hindu dies intestate, the property devolves first on Class I heirs (which include his widow, sons, daughters, mother, etc.)., • Section 15(1): When a female Hindu dies intestate, the property devolves first to her children and husband, not based on Class I or II categories, but a separate scheme of succession., • Section 15(2) provides special rules when the property is inherited from her husband or father.
Question3:- In which of the following cases did the Supreme Court strike down Section 66A of the IT Act, 2000 for violating Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution?
  • A) Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras
  • B) Shreya Singhal v. Union of India
  • C) Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
  • D) Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India
Answer is b is correct. Explanation: In Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), the Supreme Court held that Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000 was unconstitutional as it curbed the freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a).
Question4:- Section 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 empowers civil courts to try:
  • A) Only criminal matters.
  • B) All suits of civil nature unless barred.
  • C) Only suits for recovery of money.
  • D) Only suits related to property disputes.
Answer is b is correct. Explanation: • Section 9 CPC states that civil courts have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature, except those which are expressly or impliedly barred.,
Question5:- A person unlawfully dispossessed of immovable property files a suit for recovery under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act after 8 months of dispossession. What is the legal position?
  • A) The suit is maintainable if he proves ownership.
  • B) The suit is maintainable if the dispossessor had no title.
  • C) The suit is not maintainable as it was filed beyond the limitation period.
  • D) The suit can be converted into a criminal case under the IPC.
Answer is c is correct. Explanation: • As per Section 6(2) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, a suit for recovery of possession must be filed within 6 months from the date of dispossession.

Syllabus

Test Series

Notification

Brochure

Result