Daily mains Question

Questions



Date
Question/ Answer
23 May 2024
Question :- Differentiate between a Contract of Sale & Hire Purchaser?

Answer:- The following are the differences between Contract of Sale & Hire Purchaser-

CONTRACT OF SALE HIRE-PURCHASER
In it, the seller transfer or agrees to transfer the property in the goods to buyer for a price, whether paid at once or later in installments In it, there is no such agreement. It is a contract of hire and it may eventually ripen into a sale.
Buyer become owner of goods and has all rights of owner. A hirer is only a bailee of goods (i.e. in possession of goods for some time).
Ownership transfers immediately from seller to buyer. Ownership transfers only when certain number of installments paid, and at the option of hirer.
Buyer cannot terminate a contract and is bound to pay price. An agreement to buy imports a legal obligation to buy. If there was no such obligation, there cannot properly be said to have been an agreement. Hirer cannot be compelled to buy. Hirer may terminate bailment by returning the article to its owner, without any liability to pay remaining installments. If hirer defaults in payment, owner has a right to immediately resume possession of goods, without any liability to refund amount received till then.
If the seller or buyer sold goods to a third party, then such a person gets a good title, if he was acting in good faith and unaware of previous sale or any lien or right of original seller. If a hirer assigns his right to a third party (or make a sale/pledge of goods to him), then such person won't get a good title, as a hirer is not the buyer.
22 May 2024
Question :- What is the difference between False Imprisonment and Malicious Prosecution?

Answer:- The following are the differences between False Imprisonment and Malicious Prosecution-

False Imprisonment Malicious Prosecution
There is total restraint on personal liberty without lawful justification There is the element of causing damage by means of an abuse of the process of court
The actual damage need not be proven The actual damage has to be proved
The onus of proving the existence of probable and reasonable cause as justification lies on the defendant In this case, the plaintiff is to allege and prove affirmatively its non-existence
It is actionable per se It is not actionable per se
It is not necessary to prove malice. It is necessary to prove malice
A mistake of fact would not be a good defence A mistake may be a good defence
It is not necessary that there be an absence of a reasonable or probable cause It must be proved that the criminal proceedings were made without reasonable and probable cause
21 May 2024
Question :- ‘A’ a girl below 18 years of age was in the keeping of her mother. Her father ‘B’ lived separately. B by deceitful means took ‘A’ and kept her with him. Is ‘B’ guilty of kidnapping?

Answer:- Ans. The offence of kidnapping has been defined by Section 361 of the Indian Penal Code as under:

"Whoever takes or entices any minor under sixteen years of age if a male, or under eighteen years of age if a female, or any person of unsound mind, out of the keeping of the lawful guardian of such minor or person of unsound mind, without the consent of such guardian, is said to kidnap such minor or person from lawful guardianship.

Explanation: The words "lawful guardian" in this Section includes any person lawfully entrusted with the care or custody of such minor or other person.

Explanation: This Section does not extend to the act of any person who in good faith believes himself to be the father of an illegitimate child, or who in good faith believes himself to be entitled to the lawful custody of such child, unless such act is committed for an immoral or unlawful purpose."

So one of the essentials to constitute this offence is that minor must have been taken or enticed out of keeping of lawful guardian of such minor without the consent of such guardian.

If the husband and wife live separate and children are given in the custody of the wife under an order of an court, the father cannot take away the children from the mother. If he does so he will be guilty of kidnapping. But if there is no order of the Court, the removal by the father of his child from the custody of its mother, who has been deserted by him, will not amount to kidnapping from lawful guardianship because a Hindu father in preference to the mother is recognized as the legal guardian of all his legitimate male or female minor children.

In the present case, if the minor girl was in the keeping of her mother under the orders of a court, the father is liable to be convicted for an offence of kidnapping. But if there is no such order, the removal of the minor out of the keeping of her mother by father would not amount to any such offence since the father is the natural guardian of the minor, and he cannot be said to have removed the minor from the keeping of lawful guardian

20 May 2024
Question :- Write a short note Injuria sine damnum?

Answer:- The general principle is that if there is a right, there must be a remedy for its violation though the injury does not cause actual or pecuniary damages. This principle is expressed by "injuria sine damnum". The main gist of the maxim is that it refers to the violation of a legitimate right without causing any harm, loss, or injury to the aggrieved party. Whenever a legal right is infringed, the person in whom the right is vested has the right to take legal action.

Rights are of two kinds:

  • • Absolute
  • • Qualified

A violation of absolute right will furnish a cause of action, without proof of actual damage and this case is not with qualified right. Therefore, in their violation law does not presume damage without actual proof.

A classification of rights into absolute and qualified, gives rise to similar classification of torts. In this way torts are of two kinds-

  • (1) Those which are actionable per se
  • (2) Those which are actionable only on proof of actual damage resulting from them The maxim, therefore, means infringement of absolute right without any actual loss or damage. The act of trespassing upon another's land is wrongful and is actionable, even though it has done the plaintiff not the slightest harm.

In Ashby v. While, (1703), the plaintiff succeeded in his action, even though the defendant's act did not cause any damage. The plaintiff was a qualified voter at a parliamentary election, but the defendant, a returning officer, wrongfully refused to take plaintiff's vote. No loss was suffered by such refusal because the candidate for whom he wanted to vote won in spite of that. It was held that the defendant was liable.

The following observations made by the court aptly clarify the principle of the maxim:

"If the plaintiff has a right, he must of necessity have a means to vindicate and maintain it, and a remedy if he is injured in the exercise or enjoyment of it, and indeed it is a vain thing to imagine a right without a remedy, for want of right and want of remedy are reciprocal. Every injury imports a damage, though it does not cost a party one farthing (or paisa), the damage being that the person is thereby hindered of his right. As in an action for slanderous words, though a man does not lose a penny by reason of speaking them yet he shall have an action. A man shall have an action against another for riding over his ground, though it does him no damage, for it is an invasion of his property, and the other has no right to come there."

In Bhim Singh v. State of J & K, (AIR 1986), the petitioner, an M.L.A. of J & K Assembly, was wrongfully detained by the police while he was going to attend the Assembly session. Thus, he was deprived of his fundamental right to personal liberty and constitutional right to attend the Assembly session. The court awarded exemplary damages of Rs. 50,000 by way of consequential relief.

In case of injuria sine damnum the loss suffered by the plaintiff may be relevant only as regards the measure of damages. Generally nominal damages are awarded by the court. If, however, the court feels that the violation of a legal right is owing to mischievous and malicious act, as had happened in the case of Bhim Singh, the court may grant even exemplary damages.

Thus, Injuria sine damnum is a legal principle that recognizes the violation of a legal right without the need for actual loss or harm. It emphasizes the importance of protecting and upholding individual rights, ensuring that individuals are not unjustly deprived of their legal entitlements.

17 May 2024
Question :- Differentiate between Set-off & Counter Claim under the Civil Procedure Code?

Answer:- The following are the differences between Set-off & Counter Claim-

Basis Set-Off Counter Claim
Nature Statutory defence Cross-action initiated by the defendant
Basis Must be an ascertained sum or arise from the same transaction as the plaintiff’s claim Not required to arise from the same transaction
Purpose Defence against plaintiff’s claim Offensive measure against the plaintiff’s claim
Pleadings Pleaded in the written statement Treated as a separate claim
Scope Generally cannot exceed the plaintiff’s claim Can exceed the plaintiff’s claim
Jurisdiction limits Claims must not exceed the court’s pecuniary jurisdiction limits Claims must not exceed the court’s pecuniary jurisdiction limits
16 May 2024
Question :- Differentiate between Extortion and Criminal Intimidation under the Indian Penal Code?

Answer:- The following are the differences between Extortion and Criminal Intimidation-

Extortion Criminal Intimidation
Extortion is defined in Section 383 of the IPC. Criminal Intimidation is defined in Section 503 of the IPC.
Extortion means that an individual places another individual in a state of apprehension or threat to injure him or dishonestly persuade him so that he can deliver the property or any other valuable security to another person. This offence is committed when someone poses a threat to another with harm to his person, property, or reputation, and the other person is forced to perform or omit something he is not legally required to do or omit.
The main motive of extortion is to obtain money or any other valuable security. In case of Criminal Intimidation, the main purpose is to threaten someone to do any act that he is not bound to do or to induce someone not to do anything that he is legally bound to do.
In extortion, both actual and constructive forces are used. In criminal intimidation, only constructive force is used.
Delivery of the property is essential under this offence. There is no delivery of property, money, or valuable security in criminal intimidation.
The maximum punishment for extortion is 3 years. The maximum punishment for criminal intimidation is 2 years.
Extortion is a more serious nature. Criminal Intimidation is less serious as compared to Extortion.
15 May 2024
Question :- 'A' a female singer agreed to sing in theatre of 'B' for two days in September 1984. One day before the programme was scheduled; she attended a party and took lots of ice-cream. The result was that her voice was cracked and she was unable to sing on the days agreed upon in B's theatre. B sued A for damages. Can B succeed?

Answer:- According to Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872-

"A contract to do an act which after the contract is made, becomes impossible, or, by reason of some event which the promisor could not prevent, unlawful, becomes void when the act becomes impossible or unlawful."

It means that every contract is based on the assumption that the parties to the contract will be able to perform the same when the due date of performance arrives. If because of some event the performance has either become impossible or unlawful, the contract becomes void.

In Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram, 1954, the Court noted that if fulfilling a contract becomes impossible not only due to literal physical impossibility but also when the contract's object becomes impractical to fulfil, it falls within the scope of Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act.

In the present case, the female singer, A, ate ice cream a day before her scheduled performance, which caused her voice to crack. If A knew that eating ice cream would cause her voice to crack, then her action would constitute self-induced frustration. She would be liable for breaching the contract. However, it is evident from the facts that she was unaware of the consequences of eating ice cream.

Thus, B has failed to prove that A intentionally caused her voice to crack, the defence of frustration is valid, and the contract is discharged. Therefore, B is not entitled to recover any damages from A.

14 May 2024
Question :- A transport company has its head office at Chandigarh and branch offices at Chennai, Jaipur and Mumbai. A dispute cropped up between Sam and the company in respect of a transaction made through Chennai office. Sam files a suit in respect of this dispute against the company in a court at Jaipur. How the court will decide?

Answer:- According to Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, “Subject to the limitations aforesaid, every suit shall be instituted in a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction --

  • (a) the defendant, or each of the defendants where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain; or
  • (b) any of the defendants, where there are more than one, at the time of the commencement of the suit, actually and voluntarily resides, or carries on business, or personally works for gain, provided that in such case either the leave of the Court is given, or the defendants who do not reside, or carry on business, or personally work for gain, as aforesaid acquiesce in such institution;
  • (c) Or the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises.”
    According the explanation, “A corporation shall be deemed to carry on business at its sole or principal office in India or, in respect of any cause of action arising at any place where it has also a subordinate office, at such place.”

If a suit is filed against a Corporation on the ground of its carrying on business, then in view of Explanation to Section 20, a suit will lie where the Corporation has its head office even if no part of cause of action arises there or branch office where cause of action has arose.

In the present case, the suit against the Company can be filed at Chandigarh where it has its head office, or at Chennai where the Company has its branch office and cause of action has arisen at Chennai. No suit can be entertained by a Court at Jaipur or Mumbai, although the company has its branch offices at those places, because no part of the cause of action arose either at Jaipur or Mumbai.

13 May 2024
Question :- Differentiate between Kidnapping and Abduction under the Indian Penal Code?

Answer:- The following are the differences between Kidnapping and Abduction-

Kidnapping Abduction
Section 359 of IPC states the two types of kidnapping.
  • ✓ Section 360 defines kidnapping from India,
  • ✓ Section 361 defines kidnapping from lawful guardianship.
The definition of Abduction is given in Section 362 of IPC.
The offence of kidnapping is committed against a minor that is 16 years in the case of males and 18 years in the case of females. There is no provision specifying a minimum age which puts a bar on the age of the person abducted.
In kidnapping, the person is taken away or enticed. The means of doing these is irrelevant to constitute the crime. In abduction, force, deceit or compulsion is used to take a person from a place.
In Kidnapping, lawful guardian refers to a person who is legally authorised to take care of a minor or a person of unsound mind. For kidnapping, it is essential that the victim is taken away from their lawful guardian. In abduction, there is no concept of taking a person away from his/her lawful guardian.
Consent of the person kidnapped is immaterial. It is important to note that the consent of the guardian can be material. In case the person abducted gives his/her consent, it is considered that there is no offence.
Kidnapping is not a continuing offence. Abduction is a continuing offence because it does not end when a person is moved from a particular place, rather continues with every movement from one place to the other.
The offence is completed as soon as a person is taken away from the country or from his/her lawful guardianship. It is a continuing offence and involves forcibly or deceitfully taking a person from one place to another.
09 May 2024
Question :- Define Revision under Civil Procedure Code? Differentiate between Revision and Review?

Answer:- Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, vests the High Court with revisional jurisdiction. Revision, in its literal sense means reviewing, re-examining, and scrutinizing a matter to ensure its accuracy and correctness. The main purpose of Section 115 is to prevent arbitrary, capricious, illegal, or irregular conduct by Subordinate Courts in the exercise of their jurisdiction.

Section 115 of Civil Procedure Code lays down all the conditions when the High Court can exercise its revisional jurisdiction:

  • 1. The case must be decided
  • 2. The revisional jurisdiction is exercised when no appeal lies in the case decided by the Subordinate Court
  • 3. The subordinate court has decided such case by:
    •  Exercise of jurisdiction which is not vested to that court by law
    •  It has failed to exercise the vested jurisdiction
    •  Illegal exercise of the vested power or with immaterial irregularity

The following are the differences between Revision and Review-

Revision Review
Revisional jurisdiction can be exercised only by the High Court. A review is done by the court who has passed the order or decree itself.
Revisional power is exercised when no appeal lies to the High Court. Review of an order or decree can be done even if an appeal lies to the High Court.
The High Court can exercise the revisional power even suo moto (by its own motion). For review, an application is required to be filed by the aggrieved party.
The grounds for revision are mainly on jurisdiction errors. The grounds for the review are as follows:-
  • o discovery of new and important matter or evidence
  • o mistake or error apparent on the face of the record
  • o any other sufficient reasons
The order passed on exercising revisional jurisdiction is not appealable. The order granting the review is appealable.
08 May 2024
Question :- What is the difference between Presumption of Fact and Presumption of Law?

Answer:- The word Presumption, in Law of Evidence, means an inference, affirmative or negative of the existence of some fact, drawn by a Court through the process of probable reasoning. The following are the differences between Presumption of Fact and Presumption of Law-

Presumption of Fact Presumption of Law
Presumption of fact is based on logic, human experience and law of nature Presumption of law is based on provision of law.
Presumption of fact is always rebuttable. Presumption of law is conclusive unless rebutted as provided under rule giving rise to presumption.
The position of presumption of fact is uncertain and transitory. The position of presumption of law is certain and uniform.
The Court can ignore presumption of law irrelevant of the fact that how strong it is. The Court cannot ignore presumption of law.
The presumption of fact are derived on the basis of –
  • • law of nature
  • • prevalent customs
  • • human experience
Presumption of law is derived on established judicial norms and they have become part of legal rules.
The Court can exercise its discretion while drawing presumption of fact i.e. presumption of fact is discretionary presumption. Presumption of law is mandatory i.e. the court is bound to draw presumption
07 May 2024
Question :- What is the difference between Res Judicata and Estoppel?

Answer:- The following are the differences between Res Judicata and Estoppel-

  • ✓ The origin of Res Judicata is a court decision in a previous case whereas the origin of Estoppel is the act of the parties.
  • ✓ Res judicata doctrine was introduced to protect public policy by ending the litigation. On the other hand, Estoppels proceeds upon the doctrine of equity.
  • ✓ Res judicata is a bar to a court's jurisdiction. It is a fundamental test for bringing a lawsuit while Estoppel is a rule of evidence.
  • ✓ The effect of res judicata is binding on both litigants. On the contrast, when estoppel is used, the effect only applies to the party who made the previous statement or conduct and only that person will be held responsible for the new course of action.
  • ✓ Res judicata forbidden a person averring the same thing twice in the litigations whereas Estoppel prevents the person from saying two opposite things at a time.

Thus, the doctrine of Res Judicata limits a plaintiff's ability to recover damages from the defendant on the same injury more than once. In contrast, the doctrine of Estoppel safeguards people from fraud or misrepresentation.

06 May 2024
Question :- What are the grounds under which plaint can be rejected?

Answer:- The following are the grounds under which plaint can be rejected-

  • 1. If a plaint does not disclose the cause of action:
    If the plaint filed by the plaintiff, does not specify any cause of action. The court may reject the plaint if the facts mentioned do not establish a valid legal claim.
  • 2. Lack of Jurisdiction:
    The court must have the authority to hear and decide the case. If the court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter or the parties involved, the plaint can be rejected.
  • 3. Relief claim is undervalued:
    When the relief claimed is undervalued and the valuation of the claim is not corrected or extended by the court. In such case, the plaint will be rejected.
  • 4. Suit barred by law:
    If plaint itself shows that the claim is barred by limitation, the plaint can be rejected.
  • 5. Plaint not in duplicate:
    According to Order IV Rule 1, every suit shall be instituted by presenting a plaint in duplicate. If such a requirement is not fulfilled then the plaint can be rejected.
  • 6. Non-compliance with procedural formalities:
    Courts require plaints to adhere to specific formatting and filing requirements. These may include proper stamping, correct court fees, and compliance with prescribed forms. Any non- compliance can result in rejection.
  • 7. Res Judicata or Lis Pendens:
    If the matter in question has already been decided by a court or is currently pending before another court, the plaint can be rejected based on the principles of res judicata (a matter already judged) or lis pendens (a matter already in litigation).
  • 8. Vague or Ambiguous Claims:
    A plaint must clearly state the facts constituting the cause of action. If the claims are-
    • ✓ Vague
    • ✓ Ambiguous
    • ✓ lack necessary details
    It becomes difficult for the defendant to respond effectively, and the court may reject the plaint.
  • 9. Absence of Necessary Parties:
    All parties that have a direct interest in the dispute must be included in the lawsuit. Failure to join necessary parties can lead to the rejection of the plaint.
  • 10. Frivolous or Abuse of Process:
    The Courts have the authority to reject plaints that are vexatious, frivolous, or meant to abuse the legal process.

Thus, it can be concluded that if a plaint is defective on any of the grounds under Order VII Rule 11, the court has the authority to dismiss it.

04 May 2024
Question :- Differentiate between Primary Evidence & Secondary Evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872?

Answer:- Primary evidence, which is also known as best evidence, refers to the actual documents produced for the inspection of the court. Primary evidence is the most reliable proof of the existence of an object since it is the original document itself.

  • For example-
    Birth Certificate issued by Municipal Corporation

Secondary evidence refers to evidence that is presented in the absence of primary evidence. It is considered a substitute for the original or primary evidence.

  • For Example-
    Copy of 10 th mark sheet with Date of Birth is admissible in case of loss of Birth Certificate

The following are the differences between Primary Evidence and Secondary Evidence-

Primary Evidence Secondary Evidence
Section 62 of the Act defines Primary Evidence. Section 63 of the Act defines Secondary Evidence.
Primary Evidence is an original document that is presented before the court of law for inspection. Secondary Evidence is not an original document.
Primary Evidence is the main source of evidence. Secondary Evidence is not the main source of evidence but an alternative source.
The value of the evidence is the highest. It is not the best evidence and is used under exceptional circumstances. Thus, it is not a general rule to present such evidence.
Notice is not required to present such evidence. Notice is required to present such evidence.
Primary Evidence is itself admissible. Secondary Evidence is admissible only in the absence of Primary Evidence.
03 May 2024
Question :- When consent is a valid defence under the Indian Penal Code?

Answer:- Sections 87, 88 and 89 of the Indian Penal code provides the circumstances under which a valid consent can be claimed in defence of a charge for an offence. The acts which would otherwise be offences shall cease to be so in the following circumstances-

  • (1) Section 87

    According to Section 87 of the Indian Penal Code, “Nothing is an offence which is not intended to cause death on grievous hurt; if the person to whom such hurt is caused being above the age of 18 years has expressly or impliedly consented to suffer harm, or to take the risk of any harm.”

    For Example- A and Z agree to fence with each other for amusement; this agreement implies the consent of each to suffer any harm which in the course of such fencing may be caused without foul play and if A while playing fairly hurts Z, A has committed no offence.

    Section 87 applies to injuries during games, sports, or similar activities.

    In Poonai Fattemah v. Emp, the accused who professed to be a snake charmer, induced the deceased to believe him that he has the power to protect him from any harm caused by the snake bite. The deceased believed him and got bitten by the snake and died. The defence of consent was dismissed.

    It is important to note that Section 87 will not provide any protection where the act by itself is one which is prohibited by law.

  • (2) Section 88

    According to Section 88 of the Indian Penal Code, “Nothing is an offence what is not intended to cause death by reason of the harm that has resulted from that act, if it is done in good faith for benefit of another who has given his consent, express or implied, to suffer that harm or to take the risk of that harm.”

    For Example- A, a surgeon, knowing that a particular operation is likely to cause the death of Z, who suffers under a painful complaint, but not intending to cause Z's death and intending in good faith with Z's consent, performs an operation. A has committed no offence, even if it turns out that the operation is unsuccessful.

    In R.P Dhanda V. Bhurelal, the appellant, a medical doctor, performed an eye operation for cataract with patient’s consent. The operation resulted in the loss of eyesight. The doctor was protected under this defence as he acted in good faith.

  • (3) Section 89

    According to Section 89 of the Indian Penal Code, “Nothing is an offence which is in good faith for the benefit of person under twelve years of age, or of unsound mind or by consider, either express or implied, of his guardian or other person having lawful charge of that person 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 that person:

  • Provided -

  • Firstly, that this exception shall not extend to the intentional causing of death or to the attempting to cause death.
  • Secondly, that this exception shall not extend to the doing of anything which the person doing it knows to be likely to cause death for any purpose other than the preventing of death or grievous hurt or the causing of any grievous disease or infirmity.
  • Thirdly, that this exception shall not extend to the voluntarily causing of grievous hurt or the attempting to cause grievous hurt, unless it be for the purpose of preventing death, grievous hurt, or the causing of any grievous disease or infirmity.
  • Fourthly, that his exception shall not extend to the abetment of any offence, to the committing of which offence it would be extend.”

It is important to note that Section 89 of the Indian Penal Code protects acts done in good faith for the benefit of a child or an insane person or with their guardian’s consent.

02 May 2024
Question :- What is defamation? What are its kinds and differentiate between them?

Answer:- A man’s reputation is considered valuable property and every man has a right to protect his reputation. This right is acknowledged as an inherent personal right and is a jus in rem i.e., a right good against all persons in the world. Defamation refers to any oral or written statement made by a person which damages the reputation of another person.

According to Prof. Winfield - "Defamation is the publication of a statement which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right thinking members of society generality or which tends to make them shun or avoid that person."

In S.N.M. Abdi v. Prafulla Kumar Mohanta, AIR 2002, it was observed that the publication in order to be defamatory, a publication must tend to lower the plaintiff in the opinion of men whose standard of opinion, the court can properly recognise or tend to induce them to entertain an ill opinion of him.

The following are the kinds of defamation-

  • ✓ Libel
  • ✓ Slander

The following are the differences between Libel & Slander-

  • • Libel is addressed to the eyes whereas Slander is addressed to the ears
  • • In case of Libel, the defamatory statement is made in some permanent and visible form, such as writing, printing, pictures etc. whereas in case of Slander, the defamatory statement is made by spoken words or some other transitory form, whether visible or audible, such as gestures etc.
  • • Libel is an actionable tort as well as a criminal offence whereas Slander is a civil injury only and not a criminal offence except in certain cases
  • • Libel is actionable per se (in itself) i.e., without proof of actual damage while Slander is actionable only on proof of actual damage
01 May 2024
Question :- Explain Muta Marriage under Muslim Law?

Answer:- Under the Islamic law, temporary marriage, known as Muta marriage or nikah is a contractual arrangement. It involves a mutual agreement between a man and a woman to live as spouses for a predetermined duration, with an agreed-upon dower (mahr). Muta marriages automatically dissolve at the end of the specified term or upon the death of either party.

The following are the conditions of a Muta Marriage-

  • • The parties must have attained the age of puberty, which is above 15 years of age.
  • • There is no restriction on the number of Muta wives.
  • • There must be free consent by the parties.
  • • The time period and Dower must be mentioned in the nikah nama.
  • • The cohabitation between the parties is lawful.
  • • The children born out of such marriage are legitimate and have the right to inherit the properties of both parents.
  • • The husband and wife do not have any mutual right of inheritance.
  • • Muta wife is not entitled to claim maintenance under personal law, but she can claim under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.
  • • The wife is entitled to get full Dower if the husband cohabits, but if the husband doesn’t cohabit, then the wife is entitled to half dower.
  • • Divorce is not recognised under Muta Marriage.
30 April 2024
Question :- Explain “Stranger to a contract can neither sue or be sued”. State the exceptions to the rule?

Answer:- The doctrine of Privity of contract is a fundamental principle in contract law which governs the rights and obligations of parties to a contract. It means that only the parties to a contract can enforce the terms of that contract. When a contract is made between two or more parties upon certain terms and conditions, it is only those parties to contract are entitled to initiate suit.

Thus, the doctrine of Privity of contract means that only those persons who are parties to the contract can enforce the same. A stranger to the contract cannot enforce a contract even though the contract may have been entered into for his benefit.

The following are the exceptions to the doctrine of Privity of contract-

  • • In case of trust, the property of the trust is for the benefit of the beneficiaries. They are not parties to the contract of trusts but they do have a right to file the suit for preserving the trust property and safeguarding their interests.
  • • When a charge is created on property for the benefit of a person who is not a party to the contract the person in whose favour the charge is created. Such person has a right to file a suit for ensuring the benefit from charge irrespective of the fact that he is not party to the contract.
  • • At the time of partition of the joint Hindu family property, if some arrangement is made for the marriage or maintenance of a third party, such persons can file a suit for their maintenance or for the expenses of marriage although they have not been the parties to the partition agreement.
  • • When under the contract a promise is made to a person who is not a party to the contract and the contract is mainly based on such promise that third person (stranger) can bring a suit for the performance of the contracts if he fails to get the amount as per promise.
  • • If the court feels that not allowing the stranger to bring an action will amount to or result in injustice in such case the court may authorise such person to bring an action.

Therefore, it can be concluded that only parties to contract can sue each other and no stranger is allowed to enter between the parties to sue.

29 April 2024
Question :- What are Public and Private Documents? How such documents can be proved?

Answer:- Under the Indian Evidence Act, the documents have been divided into-

  • ✓ Private documents
  • ✓ Public documents

Public Documents has been defined under Section 74 of the Indian Evidence Act.

According to Section 74, the following documents are Public documents-

  • (1) Documents forming the acts are records of the act-
    • (i) Of the sovereign authority
    • (ii) Of official bodies and tribunals
    • (iii) Of public officers, legislative, judicial and executive, of any part of India or of the Commonwealth, or of a foreign country
  • (2) Public records kept in any State of private documents
    According to section 74 a document which is the act or record of the acts of a sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, public officer, legislative, judicial and executive is a public document. A public document is one prepared by a public servant in discharge of his public official duties. It must have been prepared by a public servant in his official duty.
    According to Section 75 of Indian Evidence Act, all documents other than public documents are private documents.
    Section 77 provides that the contents of public documents can be proved by filing certified copies of such documents.

    Section 78 of Act provides that Public documents may be proved in following ways-
  • (1) Acts, orders or notifications of the Central Government in any of its departments, or of the Crown Representatives of any State Government or any department of any State Government, by the records of the departments, certified by the heads of those departments respectively, or by any documents purporting to be printed by order of any such Government or; as the case may be, of the Crown Representative.
  • (2) The proceedings of the Legislature, by the journals of those bodies respectively, or by published Act or abstracts, or by copies purporting to be printed by order of the Government concerned.
  • (3) Proclamations, orders or regulations issued by Her Majesty or by Privy Council, or by any department of Her Majesty's Government, by copies or extracts contained in the London Gazette, or purporting to be printed by the Queen's Printer.
  • (4) The Act of the Executive or the proceedings of the legislature of a foreign country, by journals published by their authority, or commonly received in that country as such, or by a copy certified under the seal of the country or sovereign, or by a recognition thereof in some Central Act.
  • (5) The proceedings of a Municipal Body in a State; by a copy of such proceedings, certified by the legal keeper thereof, or by a printed book purporting to be published by the authority of such body.
  • (6) Public documents of any other class in a foreign country, by the original, or by a copy printed by the legal keeper thereof, with a certified under the seal of Notary Public, or of an Indian Council or diplomatic agent, that the copy is duly certified by the officer having the legal custody of original, and upon proof of the character of the document according to the law of the foreign country.
27 April 2024
Question :- Explain the maxim ‘Volenti non fit injuria’?

Answer:- Volenti non fit injuria is a settled principle of law that no man can sue for a tort which he had consented either –

  • ✓ expressly or
  • ✓ impliedly

For example - injuries received in course of a lawful game or sports are not actionable.

The latin maxim Volenti non fit injuria means a harm suffered voluntarily does not constitute legal injury and as such it is not actionable.

The following are the ingredients of the maxim volenti non fit injuria-

  • The plaintiff had the knowledge of risk
  • The plaintiff with the knowledge of risk has voluntarily agreed to suffer the harm
  • (1) Knowledge of Risk
    According to the maxim Volenti non fit injuria, the Plaintiff must know the nature of the act and its extent of risk or danger. If the plaintiff is unaware or reasonably cannot understand the nature and extent of the risk with the performance of an act. It is presumed that he had no knowledge of risk and defence of volenti non fit injuria will not be available to the defendant.
  • (2) Free-consent
    In Smith v. Baker & Sons, (1891), the plaintiff was an employee of the defendant and the site where he used to work had a crane which carried rocks over their heads. The plaintiff had also complained to the defendant about it. One day the plaintiff was injured because of these rocks falling on him. Thus, he sued the defendant for damages. It was held that the defendant was liable and had to pay damages to the plaintiff because the plaintiff had consented to the danger of the job but not to the lack of care.

Thus, volenti non fit injuria is one of the defence under the law of torts in which the person who has committed a wrong is exempted from liability.

26 April 2024
Question :- What are the differences in Pardoning powers of the President of India (Article 72) and Governors (Article 161)?

Answer:- Pardon is an act of mercy or forgiveness. Article 72 of the Constitution of India provides pardoning power to the President of India whereas Article 161 bestows the same power to the Governor of the state. The following are the differences between Article 72 and Article 161-

Basis of differentiation President Governor
Scope of the pardoning power The pardoning power of the President is wider in its scope. The pardoning power of the Governor is not as broad as that of the President of India.
Power with respect to a punishment or sentence by a Court Martial The President of India has the power to grant pardon
  • ✓ Reprieve
  • ✓ Respite
  • ✓ Suspension
  • ✓ Remission or
  • ✓ Commutation
In respect of punishment or sentence by a Court martial.
The Governor of a state has no such power.
Provision under the Constitution The pardoning power of a President is provided under Article 72 of the Constitution of India. The pardoning power of the Governor is dealt under Article 161 of the Constitution of India.
Power with respect to grant of a death sentence The President of India has the sole power to grant pardon, reprieve, respite, suspension, remission, or communication in respect of a death sentence. The Governor of India does not have the authority to pardon a death sentence.
25 April 2024
Question :- What is the difference between Muta Marriage and Nikah?

Answer:- The following are the differences between Muta Marriage and Nikah-

  • 1. The regular marriage (Nikah) is recognised by both Shias and Sunnis whereas Muta marriage is recognised only by Shia sect.
  • 2. Nikah is a permanent contract while Muta marriage is temporary and is for specified period of time.
  • 3. In Nikah, the partners are entitled to right to inherit the property whereas in case of Muta Marriage, there is no such right to inheritance of property.
  • 4. In Nikah, the relation once established between a wife and husband is dissolved only on divorce or death of any of them whereas Muta Marriage is automatically dissolved on the expiry of the specified period.
  • 5. In Muta Marriage, there is a specified dower whereas in Nikah, dower can be given at any time in the marriage.
  • 6. In Muta Marriage, there is a provision of one-half dower in case of no consummation whereas in Nikah, full dower is provided to the wife whether consummation is done or not.
  • 7. In Nikah, the dower can either be expressed or implied while in Muta marriage, it is always expressed.
  • 8. In Nikah, the wife is entitled to get maintenance during the period of Iddat in case of divorce while in Muta marriage, a woman has no right to take maintenance after the dissolution of marriage.
24 April 2024
Question :- Discuss the powers of the President under the Constitution of India?

Answer:- The following are the powers of the President-

  • 1) Executive Powers of President
    Article 52 of the Constitution lay down that there shall be a President of India. Further Article 53(1) provides that the executive powers of the union shall be vested in the President and it shall be exercised by him either directly or through officer’s subordinates to him in accordance with law.
  • 2) Financial Powers of the President
    • • To introduce the money bill, the prior recommendation of President is must
    • • To make a demand for grants, the recommendation of President is a pre-requisite
    • • Contingency Fund of India is under the control of the President
  • 3) Judicial Powers of President
    • • The appointment of Chief Justice and Supreme Court/High Court Judges are on the President
  • 4) Pardoning Powers
      According to Article 72 (1) the President shall have the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites or remissions of punishment or to suspend, remit and commute the sentence of any person convicted by any offence:
    • a) In all cases where the punishment or sentence is by a Court Marshall.
    • b) In all cases where the punishment or sentence is for an offence against any law relating to a matter to which the executive powers of the Union extends.
    • c) In all cases where the sentence is a sentence of death.
  • 5) Diplomatic Powers of President
    • • International Treaties and agreements that are approved by the Parliament are negotiated and concluded in his name
    • • The President is the representative of India in international forums and affairs
  • 6) Military Powers of President
      The President is the commander of the defence forces of India. He appoints:
    • 1. Chief of the Army
    • 2. Chief of the Navy
    • 3. Chief of the Air Force
  • 7) Ordinance making Power of the President
    Article 123 deals with the ordinance making power of the President. The President has many legislative powers and this power is one of them. He promulgates an ordinance on the recommendation of the Union Cabinet.
  • 8) Veto Power of the President
    The Veto Power of the President of India is provided by Article 111 of the Indian Constitution. When a bill is introduced in the Parliament, Parliament can pass the bill and before the bill becomes an act, it has to be presented to the President for his approval. It is on the President to either reject the bill or return the bill or withhold his assent to the bill. The choice of the President over the bill is called his veto power.
  • 9) Emergency Powers
    Under the Provisions of Article 352, 356 and 350, the President has the power to declare emergency situation either in the whole territory of India or in any State or part of it.
23 April 2024
Question :- What is a Partnership? What are the essentials elements of Partnership?

Answer:- The term ‘Partnership’ is defined under Section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 as-

"Partnership is the relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all."

According to Section 4 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, the following are the essential elements which are necessary to constitute a Partnership-

  • ✓ There should be an agreement between the persons who wants to be partners
  • ✓ The purpose of creating partnership should be carrying of business
  • ✓ The motive for the creation of partnership should be acquiring and sharing profits
  • ✓ All of them or any of them acting for all, i.e. in mutual agency should carry on the business of the firm
  • 1) Agreement
    The first element relates to the voluntary contractual nature of partnership. It emphasizes the fact that partnership can only arise as a result of an agreement, express or implied, between parties. It is important to note that it cannot be the result of a status.
  • 2) Business
    Partnership can be formed only for the purpose of carrying on some business. According to Section 2(b) of Partnership Act provides that the term ‘business’ includes every trade, occupation or profession.
  • 3) Sharing of Profits
    An important element in the definition of Partnership is the motive, which leads to the formation of a firm, i.e., sharing of profits. The members of religious or charitable societies or clubs are not partners, as the idea of sharing of profits is not involved in these associations. The sharing of losses is not involved in the definition because an agreement to share losses is not a test of the existence of partnership but is generally implied in a partnership agreement.
  • 4) Mutual Agency
    The cardinal principle which governs partnership is the mutual agency amongst the partners. It means each partner is the agent of the firm as well as of the other partners. The business of the firm may be carried on by all the partners or by any of them acting for all.

Therefore, the above mentioned elements must be present in order to constitute a Partnership.

20 April 2024
Question :- ‘A’ while his wife ‘W’ as still alive promised to marry X in the event of W's death. Later ‘W’ died. X sues for damage for breach of promise to marry her. Decide?

Answer:- In the case in hand, ' A' entered into a contract to marry with 'X' while'A's wife (W) was still living. Later, when 'W' died 'X' filed suit against 'A' for breach of agreement and for damages. It is important to find out whether such agreement between 'A' and 'X' is enforceable or not?

Now the question arises whether after the death of A's wife 'W', is this contract enforceable or not?

Section 23 of Indian Contract Act comes into the picture which lays down that:

The consideration or object of an agreement is lawful unless:

  • a) it is forbidden by law or
  • b) is of such nature that if permitted, it would defeat the provision of law
  • c) is fraudulent
  • d) involves or implies injury to a person or property of another
  • e) the court regards it as immoral or opposed to public policy

In each of these cases consideration or object of an agreement is said to be unlawful. Every agreement of which object or consideration is unlawful is void.

In the present case, making agreement to marry with other woman during the life time of a wife is prohibited by society as well as by law being immoral and opposed to public policy. Thus, agreement between 'A' and 'X' is void being its object is unlawful.

16 April 2024
Question :- Write a short note on Immovable Property?

Answer:- Section 3 of Transfer of Property Act defines Immovable Property as, Immovable property does not include standing timber, growing crops or grass.

The definition of Immoveable property under Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act does not clearly state the real nature of the term.

According to Section 3(26) of General Clause Act, Immovable property shall include land benefits to arise out of land and things attached to earth or permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth.

The definition of Immoveable property as given in General clause Act 1897 is also not comprehensive. However, merging the above definitions, immovable property can be summed as-

  • (a) Land
  • (b) Benefits to arise out of land
  • (c) Things attached to the earth, except standing timber growing crops and grass
    • ✓ Land Land means determinate portion of earth's surface (For example- lake, mountains etc.) and objects beneath the surface like Mines etc. or all other objects placed by human agency on or under the surface with intention of permanent annexation in order to become a part of the land.
    • ✓ Benefits To Arise Out of Land Apart from the property being immovable from the physical point of view very benefit arising out of it and every interest in such property is also regarded as immoveable property. The Right to receive future rent, Right to take minerals, Right collect lac from Jungle, fish from pond are examples of benefits arising out of land.
    • ✓ Things Attached To Earth
      Things attached to earth includes-
      • • Thing rooted in the earth
      • • Things embedded in the earth
      • • Things attached to what is so embedded
      • • Chattels attaches to earth or Building

To sum up, it can be said that everything attached to the earth with the intention of permanently fixing the same comes under the purview of immovable property. Apart from this, everything else falls into the category of movable property.

15 April 2024
Question :- Explain the difference between Shia Sect of Schools and Sunni Sect of schools?

Answer:- The following are the differences between Shia Sect of Schools and Sunni Sect of Schools -

Basis of Difference Shia Sunni
Law of marriage Temporary Marriages (Muta) is lawful. Temporary Marriages (Muta) is unlawful.
Dower Under Shia law, there is no minimum limit fixed. But under the Shia law ‘proper’ dower should not exceed 500 dirhams. Ten Dirhams is the minimum amount of dower, under Sunni law.
Talaq The Shia law does not recognise divorce pronounced under such circumstances. Under Sunni law, where the words of divorce used by the husband are ‘express’. The divorce is valid even if it was pronounced under compulsion or in a state of voluntary intoxication.
Maternity The Shia law distinguishes between child of fornication and child whose mother was validly married before conception but her husband disavowed its parentage. Maternity under Sunni law is fixed in the woman who gave birth to the child whether from the adulterous intercourse or of a valid contract of marriage.
Gift Under Shia law, a gift of an undivided share is valid, though it be a share in property capable of partition. A gift of undivided share (mushaa) in a property which is capable of division is irregular under the Sunni law, unless some special conditions are satisfied.
Inheritance Under Shia law, there are only two classes of heirs,
  • • Sharers
  • • residuaries
    • ✓ heirs by consanguinity
    • ✓ heirs by marriage
According to Sunni law, there are three classes of heirs, namely,
  • ✓ Sharers
  • ✓ residuaries
  • ✓ distant kindred
10 April 2024
Question :- What will be the effect when prescribed period of any suit or appeal expires on the day when the Court is closed?

Answer:- Section 4 of the Limitation Act provides:

"Where the prescribed period for any suit, appeal or application expires on a day when the court is closed, the suit, appeal or application may be instituted, preferred or made on the day when the court reopens."

Explanation added to Section 4 of the Act states that:
"A court shall be deemed to be closed on any day within the meaning of this Section if during any part of its normal hours it remains closed on that day."

For Example, if a Court reopens on 1st January and the time for filing the appeal expires on 31 st December (the day on which the Court remains closed) then the appeal can be preferred on the 1 st of January when the Court reopens.

In Maqbool Ahmed v. Omkar Pratap Singh, AIR 1935, it was held that Section 4 of the Limitation Act merely permits the filing of the suit etc. on the date beyond the period of the limitation i.e. where the period of limitation expires on the day when the Court is closed, then in such case, an application may be made on the day when the court re-opens.

Thus, Section 4 of the Act does not extend the period of the limitation. Section 4 merely embodies a rule of elementary justice that if the time allowed by statute to do an act or to take a proceeding expires on a day when the court is closed, it may be done on the next sitting of the Court.

09 April 2024
Question :- “Risk prima facie passes with the property.” State the exceptions, if any?

Answer:- The Risk prima facie passes with property is the general rule of Contract of Sale as incorporated under Section 26 of Sales of Goods Act which provides that:

Unless otherwise agreed the goods remain at the selles risk until the property therein is transferred to buyer but when the property therein is transferred to buyer, the goods are at the risk of buyer whether delivery has been made or not.

Provided that where delivery has been delayed through the fault of either buyer or seller the goods are at the risk of party in default as regard any loss which might not have occurred but for such fault.

Provided also that nothing in this Section shall affect duties or liabilities of either seller or buyer as bailee of goods of other party.

Thus, in case of either contract of sale or an agreement to sell after the parties have entered into contract, whoever is the owner of goods, the goods shall be at his risk, he may not be in possession of or delivery of goods may not be made to him.

The rule ‘Risk prima facie follows with property’ has the following exceptions-

  • • If parties have decided contrary
  • • If delivery of goods is delayed through fault of either party
  • • If goods are in possession of either party as Bailee
08 April 2024
Question :- What is meant by Attestation? What are the requisites of a valid attestation under the Transfer of Property Act?

Answer:- An Attestation means witnessing of execution of deed such as Will, Mortgage, Gift or sale etc. In case of attestation, it is necessary to prove that the executant of deed signed in presence of attesting witnesses and witnesses signed the deed in presence of the executant. Section 3 of the Transfer of the Property Act defines the term attested “in relation to an instrument, means and shall be deemed always to have meant attested by two or more witnesses each of whom has seen the executant sign or affix his mark to the instrument, or has seen some other person sign the instrument in the presence and by the direction on the executant, or has received from the executant a personal acknowledgement, of his signature or mark, or of the signature of such other person and each of whom has signed the instrument in the presence of the executant, but it shall not be necessary that more than one of such witnesses shall have been present at the same time, and no form of attestation shall be necessary.”

In Kumar Harish Chandera Singh Deo v. Bansidhar Mohanty and Others, AIR 1965, it was observed that the object of the attestation is to protect the executant from being required to execute a document by the other party there to by force, fraud or undue influence.

In Abdul Jabbar Sahib v. H. Venkata Sastri, 1969, the Supreme Court observed that to attest is to hear witness to a fact. For attestation it is essential that witness should have put his signature "animo attestendi" that is for the purpose of attesting that he has seen the executant sign or has received from him a personal acknowledgement of his signature. If a person puts his signature on the document for some other purpose for example to clarify that he is a scribe or identifier or a registering officer, he is not an attesting witness.

In order to constitute valid attestation, the following essentials are required:-

  • 1. There must be two attesting witness
  • 2. Each of them must have seen the executant sign or fix his mark to the instrument
  • 3. Each of the two attesting witness must have signed the instrument in the presence of the executant
  • 4. The attestation can only take place after the execution of the legal instrument is ready for it to be a valid one
  • 5. No particular form of attestation is necessary
  • 6. An attestor should be sui generis, i.e., capable of entering into contract
05 April 2024
Question :- What is a Dower? Classify the types of Dower under the Muslim Law?

Answer:- Dower is anything whether money or other property which the wife is entitled to get from her husband in consideration of entering into marriage contract. According to Muslim Law, Marriage is a civil contract and dower is necessary result of it being a part of the consideration of her agreement to become her husband's wife by consummating the marriage.

According to Amir Ali, “Dower is a consideration for his wife's sole and exclusive use and benefit.”

According to Wilson, “Dower is a consideration for the surrender or person by the wife.”

Thus, Dower is a sum of money paid by husband to his wife in consideration of marriage at the time of marriage, before or after the marriage.

The dower may be classified into:-

  • 1. Specified Dower
    Specified Dower is a fixed Dower. It is paid by the husband to his wife at the time of marriage, before or after the marriage. In Hanifi school of Muslim law, 10 drihams is fixed for Dower whereas in Maliki school of Muslim law, 3 drihams is fixed for Dower. Specified Dower is also known as Mahr- i- mussama.

    It is important to note that the Shia law does not fix any minimum amount for dower.

    The Specified Dower is further classified into-
    • a. Prompt Dower Prompt Dower is paid immediately after the marriage.
    • b. Deferred Dower Deferred Dower is paid after happening of a particular event like after divorce, death of husband, adultery, cruelty, matrimonial offences etc.
  • 2. Customary or Proper dower
    When the amount of the dower has not been settled, or even when the marriage has been contracted on an express stipulation that the wife shall not claim any dower, she is entitled to proper or customary dower. It is also termed dower of her equals.
    The following are the basis on which the customary dower is determined-
    • • The personal qualification of the wife. Everything is considered from her beauty to intelligence.
    • • The social status of the wife’s father and family background is considered.
    • • The amount of Dower given to her family females is considered.
    • • The economic and social status of the husband is also taken into consideration.
    • • The other factors, such as present circumstances and family situations at the time of determining Dower.

Under Shia Law, the Proper Dower should not exceed 500 dirhams.

04 April 2024
Question :- Compare Old Sedition Law under Indian Penal Code, 1860 vs. New Sedition Law under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?

Answer:- Sedition was previously provided in section 124A of the Indian Penal, 1860 which was first introduced in the year 1870 by English jurist James Stephen. But after the introduction of the new Criminal Law i.e. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), a new offence including “acts endangering the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India” under Section 152 has been added to the Act.

Earlier, the offence of sedition was dealt under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. According to Section 124A, in order to attract the offence of Sedition the following elements must exists-

  • • Words, written or spoken, or any physical representations or signs communicated to the people.
  • • Such words or actions incite or attempt to incite disaffection, hatred, or contempt among the people
  • • Such feelings of disaffection, hatred, or contempt towards the government established by law
  • • This leads to public unrest and violence

The punishment under Section 124A of the IPC ranges from imprisonment up to three years to a life term, to which a fine may be added.

On the other hand, under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Sedition has been replaced by a new offence defined under Section 152. According to Section 152 of BNS, “Whoever,purposely or knowingly, by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or by electronic communication or by use of financial means, or otherwise, excites or attempts to excite, secession or armed rebellion or subversive activities, or encourages feelings of separatist activities or endangers sovereignty or unity and integrity of India; or indulges in or commits any such act shall be punished with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.”

Section 152 of BNS, places higher priority in safeguarding national interests and acknowledging the threats to sovereignty extend beyond dissent against ruling authorities. While Section 124A of the IPC, laid emphasis on protection of the government from disaffection. Both Section 152 of BNS and Section 124A of IPC, protects legitimate dissent expressed through lawful means.

Section 124 A of IPC was introduced by the British intending to punish any criticism against them whereas the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita aims at serving justice and not suppression and punishment.

The minimum punishment under Section 152 of BNS is enhanced to seven years as opposed to three years under Section 124A. Further, the offence is no longer punishable with only fine as was the offence of sedition but with both fine and imprisonment.

Thus, it can be concluded that the new Sedition law under Section 152 of BNS creates a delicate balance by ensuring the protection of individual freedoms while tackling serious threats to the nation effectively.

03 April 2024
Question :- Explain the doctrine of Sufficient Cause under the Limitation Act, 1963?

Answer:- Section 5 of Limitation Act provides that Any appeal or any application other than an application under any of the provisions of Order XXI of Code of Civil Procedure 1908, may be admitted after the prescribed period if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had Sufficient Cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period.

It means that any appeal or application (other than one made under Order XXI of C.P.C.) may be admitted after prescribed period if appellant or applicant as the case may be shows Sufficient Cause for not preferring appeal or making application within the prescribed period. The court has a discretion to admit or refuse the proceeding even if sufficient cause is shown.

Explanation to Section 5 states that The fact that the appellant or the applicant was misled by any order, practice or judgement of the High Court in ascertaining or computing the prescribed period may be sufficient cause within the meaning of this Section.”

In Balwant Singh v. Jagdish Singh, the Court held that a party seeking condonation of delay must show that they were acting bona fide and had taken all possible measures within their power and did not approach the court with any unnecessary delay.

Recently, in Sabarmati Gas Limited v. Shah Alloys Limited (2023), the Supreme Court observed that Sufficient Cause is the cause for which a party could not be blamed.

Examples of sufficient cause-

  • Imprisonment of the party or serious illness
  • Mistake of law
  • Delay in obtaining the certified copies, etc.

In Collector of Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji AIR 1987, the Supreme Court laid down following principles for dealing the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act:

  • ✓ Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late.
  • ✓ Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties.
  • ✓ Everyday's delay must be explained.
  • ✓ When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done of a non-deliberate delay.
  • ✓ There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account culpable negligence or on account of mala fides. A litigant does not stand to benefit by resorting to delay.
  • ✓ It must be grasped that judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and it is expected to do so.

It was pointed out that the Courts should adopt liberal approach in the matter of condonation of delay keeping in view the above principles. Hence, it can be concluded that the remedy provided under the Limitations Act to condone the delay where a sufficient cause has been provided for the same should be construed liberally in order to meet the ends of justice.

02 April 2024
Question :- Difference between the Contract of Indemnity and Contract of Guarantee?

Answer:- The following are the differences between the Contract of Indemnity and Contract of Guarantee-

  • • There are two parties in contract of indemnity i.e. indemnifier and indemnity holder whereas in a contract of guarantee, there are three parties i.e. surety, principal debtor and creditor.
  • • A Contract of indemnity consists of one contract whereby an indemnifier promises to indemnify the indemnity-holder for certain loss whereas in Contract of Guarantee, there are three contracts between parties inter-se.
    • 1. Between principal debtor and creditor in respect of debt or obligation to be discharged by principal debtor
    • 2. Surety undertakes to perform same obligation if principal debtor fails to perform
    • 3. Between principal debtor and surety whereby principal debtor is bound to indemnify the surety for payment of debt or discharge of obligation, made by surety under the contract of guarantee
  • • A contract of indemnity is to protect the promisee against some loss whereas an object of contract of guarantee is to provide additional security to the creditor for debt or liability.
01 April 2024
Question :- Explain the essentials conditions for a marriage under Hindu Marriage Act?

Answer:- Section 5 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 lays down essential conditions for a Marriage under Hindu Marriage Act. Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act provides that A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus if the following conditions are fulfilled which are as follows-

  • (i) Neither party has a spouse living at the time of marriage
  • (ii) At the time of marriage neither party is-
    • (a) Incapable of giving valid consent to it in consequence of unsoundness of mind
    • (b) Though capable of giving valid consent but has been suffering from mental disorder of such kind or to such extent as to be unfit for marriage and the procreation of children
    • (c) Has been subject to recurrent attacks of insanity
  • (iii) The bridegroom has completed the age of twenty one years and the bride, the age of eighteen years at the time of the marriage
  • (iv) The parties are not within the degree of prohibited relationship unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two
  • (v) The parties are not sapindas of each other unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two.

Thus, Section 5 prescribes the essential requisites for a Hindu Marriage such as –

  • • Monogamy
  • • Mental capacity of parties
  • • Age of the parties
  • • Degrees of prohibited relationship
  • • Sapinda relationship

It is important to note that these conditions of marriage are supplemented by certain ceremonies as provided under Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

30 March 2024
Question :- What are the key features which are introduced by Bharatiye Nyaya Sanhita (BNS)?

Answer:- The following are the key features which are introduced by the new Bhartiye Nyaya Sanhita-

  • 1. Section 2 of the BNS, 2023
    It includes definitions of child and transgender. The terms Electronic and digital records have been included in the definition of document to demonstrate their importance. The definition of ‘movable property’ has also been revised i.e. “includes property of every description, except land and things attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything which is attached to the earth.”
  • 2. Section 48 of the BNS, 2023
    Introduced a new provision- Abetment outside India for offence in India. It means that any individual who conspire to carry out an offence in India while sitting in another country can be held liable under BNS.
  • 3. Section 69 of the BNS
    Introduced a new offence- sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means, etc. It states that any individual by-
    • ✔️ false promise of marriage
    • ✔️ employment or
    • ✔️ promotion engages in sexual intercourse
    Will be punished with imprisonment for a term extending to 10 years and will be liable to fine.
  • 4. Elimination of Age based distinction for punishment in Gang rape cases of a Minor girl
    The introduction of the new BNS law eliminated the age-based distinction for punishment in gang rape cases of a minor girl. It mandates life imprisonment of the death penalty for the crime of gang rape of a woman below 18 years of age Section 70(2).
  • 5. Mob Lynching
    A new provision has been introduced in the BNS which deals with the offence of mob lynching where under Section 103(2) it is provided that when a group of five or more persons acting in concert commits murder on the ground of race, caste or community, sex, place of birth, language, personal belief or any other similar ground each member of such group shall be punished with death or with imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.
  • 6. Punishment for Causing Death by Negligence
    The BNS, 2023, has modified the punishment for causing death by negligence from 2 years to 5 five years imprisonment under Section 106 (i). Moreover, it also highlighted that if such an act is done by a registered medical practitioner he/she should be punished with imprisonment for a term extending to 2 years and a fine.
  • 7. Organized Crimes
    Section 111 of the BNS, 2023, introduced deterrent punishments for organized crime such as land grabbing, kidnapping, contract killing, cybercrime, extortion, trafficking of persons or goods or weapons or drugs, and financial scams. It states that anyone who attempts or commits an organized crime will be punished with life imprisonment or death and a Rs. 10 Lakhs fine in case the offence results in the death of any individual and for others the punishment will be less than 5 years extending to life imprisonment and a fine of at least 5 lakh rupees.
  • 8. Terrorist Acts
    S.113 of BNS introduced a new provision which defines a terrorist act and lays down the punishments for the commission of the same, for conspiring/ attempting to commit/advocating/abetting/advising/inciting or knowingly facilitating the commission, for organizing camp to train terrorist or recruiting persons for committing such acts, for being a member of an organization involved, for harbouring or concealing a terrorist, for possessing proceeds of such acts.
  • 9. Elimination of Sedition
    The BNS of 2023 eliminated the Section related to Sedition (specifically Section 124A of the IPC) upholding the constitutional right of freedom of speech and expression. It introduced a new provision, Section 152 where any person who conducted an act endangering the sovereignty, unity, and integrity of India will be punished with life imprisonment or imprisonment extending to 7 years and a fine.
  • 10. Snatching
    Section 304 of the BNS 2023 has also introduced a new offence of ‘Snatching’ which states that theft is snatching “if in order to commit theft the offender suddenly or quickly or forcibly seizes or secures or grabs or takes away from any person or from his possession any movable property”.

Thus, the BNS marks a step forward toward a modernized legal framework, it not only amends existing Indian Penal Code but also introduces various new provisions that may improve efficiency, fairness, and transparency in the legal process.

29 March 2024
Question :- When are the oral admissions regarding the contents of a document are relevant?

Answer:- Section 22 of Indian Evidence Act provides that Oral admissions as to contents of a document are not relevant, unless and until the party proposing to prove them shows that he is entitled to give secondary evidence of the contents of such document under the rules hereinafter contained or unless genuineness of document produced is in question.

Section 22 of Act contemplates basic principle of law of evidence that when there has been a document, nobody can be permitted to prove oral admission about the contents of that document. For example-

A executed a deed of mortgage in favour of T. T files a suit for possession of property mortgagee on the basis of that mortgage. During the trial, A denied the execution of mortgage. Now in this case, T cannot prove by oral evidence that he had admitted before some persons that he had mortgaged the property to him. T can prove the execution of mortgage and can get possession of property only when he files that deed of mortgage in court and proves it.

It is important to note that there are two exceptions to Section 22-

  • (a) When a person is entitled to give secondary evidence of contents of some documents he will be entitled to rely on oral admission
  • (b) Under section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, secondary evidence of contents of document can be given when original is lost or it is in possession of opposite party
28 March 2024
Question :- What do you understand by Representative Suit under the Civil Procedure Code?

Answer:- The general Rule is that all persons interested in the suit should be joined as party to it so that matter involved in it may finally and completely be adjudicated upon and fresh litigation over the same matter may be avoided. Order I Rule VIII of Civil Procedure Code is an exception to above said general rule. It provides that when there are number of persons commonly interested in a suit, one or more of them can with the leave or upon the direction of court, sue or be sued on behalf of themselves and other. It is important to Plaintiff in representative suit need not to obtain previous consent of persons whom he represents.

A Representative Suit may be defined as suit filed by or against one or more persons on behalf of themselves and others having same interest in the suit.

Order I Rule VIII of Civil Procedure Code has been enacted in order to save time and expense to ensure that a single comprehensive trial of question in which numerous persons are interested and also to avoid harassment to parties by multiplicity of suits.

However, Order I Rule VIII of Civil Procedure Code contains only enabling provisions and does not compel any one to represent many. Order I Rule VIII also does not vest a right of suit in a person, if he by himself has no right to sue. It is necessary to bring the case within the provisions of Order I Rule VIII all the members of a class should have common interest in a subject matter and a common grievance and relief should in its nature be beneficial to all.

The following conditions must exist for application of Order I Rule VIII of Civil Procedure Code-

  • • The parties must be numerous
  • • They must have same or common interest in suit
  • • Permission must have been granted or direction must have been given by the court
  • • Notice must have been issued to parties whom it proposed to represent in the suit
27 March 2024
Question :- What are the rights of an Indemnity Holder under the Indian Contract Act?

Answer:- Section 125 of Indian Contract Act is relevant which provides indemnity holder can bring an action against indemnifier to recover damages and costs etc. The Indemnity holder acting within the scope of his authority has following rights-

  • • An indemnity-holder is entitled to claim all damages which he may have been compelled to pay
  • • An indemnity-holder is entitled to recover all costs reasonably incurred in resisting or reducing or ascertaining the claim. But the party indemnified cannot recover costs when he has not acted as a prudent man in defending the action against him or has not been authorised by the indemnifier to defend the suit or where the costs incurred have been unreasonable in amount
  • • An indemnity-holder can compromise a claim on the best terms he can and then bring an action on the contract of indemnity
23 March 2024
Question :- What is the difference between Limitation and Laches?

Answer:- The following are the differences between limitation and laches-

  • 1. In case of limitation, the knowledge of the ignorance of the plaintiff with respect to his right is deemed immaterial while the knowledge of the plaintiff about right if proved defeats the claim due to laches. The term laches means, negligence or slackness. The doctrine of laches is based on the principle that `delay defeats equity.
    In Roop Chand v. Madan Mohan, 1960, it was observed that the basis of doctrine of limitation is public policy whereas the basis of the doctrine of laches is `equity. Laches like limitation no doubt deprive plaintiff of his remedy but it depends upon general principles of justice and fair play while limitation depends upon express law.
  • 2. Limitation prescribes a period of time within which a suit must be filed in the court, whereas period time is not fixed for laches. In case of laches, it is the duty of a court to see
    • I. Whether the evidences of the case have been lost or destroyed due to the delay caused by plaintiff
    • II. Whether the plaintiff caused unreasonable delay
    • III. Whether the defendant has been induced by the plaintiff by causing delay or commission to alter his position or to incur an expense.

    The doctrine of laches is applied in India in the following cases-

    • . Cases relating to the Specific Relief Act
    • . Cases of temporary injunction
    • . Cases of interlocutory orders
    • . Cases relating to marriage and divorce
    • . Cases relating to limitation
  • 3. The law of limitation is based on public policy and general utility while laches is based on equity.
  • 4. The plea of limitation is raised by the defendant against the plaintiff whereas the plea of laches can be raised against either i.e. plaintiff or defendant.
22 March 2024
Question :- Write a short note on Solitary Confinement?

Answer:- Section 73 of Indian Penal Code deals with Solitary Confinement. Section 73 of the Indian Penal Code provides -

"Whenever any person is convicted of an offence for which under this code, the court has power to sentence him to rigorous imprisonment, the court may by its sentence, order that the offender shall be kept in solitary confinement for any portion or portions of imprisonment to which he is sentenced not exceeding three months in the whole, according to following scale, that is to say -

  • A time not exceeding one month if the term of imprisonment shall not exceed six months
  • A time not exceeding two months if the term of imprisonment shall exceed six months and shall not exceed one year;
  • A time not exceeding three months if the term of imprisonment shall exceed one year."

In Ramanjulu Naidu v. State, 1947, it was observed that solitary confinement should not be ordered unless there are special features appearing in evidence such as extreme violence or brutality in the commission of offence.

Section 74 of the Indian Penal Code provides limit of solitary confinement-

"In executing a sentence of solitary confinement, such confinement shall in no case exceed fourteen days at a time with intervals between the periods of solitary confinement of no less duration than such periods, and when the imprisonment awarded shall exceed three months, the solitary confinement shall not exceed seven days in any one month of the whole imprisonment awarded with intervals between the periods of solitary confinement of not less duration than such periods."

Thus, it can be concluded that Solitary confinement is a complete isolation of prisoner from the society. Section 73 and 74 of the Indian Penal Code gives lawful recognition to solitary confinement and puts certain limits due to its severe character.

21 March 2024
Question :- The question is whether certain goods Ordered from B were delivered to A. The goods were delivered to several intermediate persons successively. Is each delivery a relevant fact?

Answer:- Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act makes the constituent incidents of a transaction relevant, if a part of the transaction is a fact in issue. These constituent incidents may be –

  • • Acts
  • • declarations
  • • other facts accompanying or explaining the transaction

In the present case, each delivery to the intermediate persons successively is a part of the same transaction. (Illustration (d) of Section 6 of the Act)

Therefore, it is relevant under Section 6 of the Indian Evidence Act.

20 March 2024
Question :- Write a short note on Mistake of Fact?

Answer:- Section 76 of Indian Penal Code is a well-established from a Common law maxim ignoratia facit excusat ignoratia juris non excusat which means in criminal law mistake of fact is a good defence while mistake of law is no defence. Every man is presumed to know law. The reason why ignorance of law is never a defence is that if it were a defence, it would screen offenders and lead to endless complications.

Section 76 lays down:
Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who is or who by reason of mistake of fact and not by reason of mistake of law in good faith believes himself to be bound by law to do it.

Section 79 of Indian Penal Code provides:
Nothing is an offence which is done by any person who is justify by law or who by reason of mistake of fact and not by reason of mistake of law, in good faith, believes himself to be justified by law, doing it.

In R. v. Tolson, it was observed Honest and reasonable mistake stands on the same footing as absence of reasoning faculty as in infancy. In this case, Accused had gone through the ceremony of marriage within seven years after she had been deserted by her husband. She believed in good faith and on reasonable grounds that her husband was dead. It was held that a bonafide belief on reasonable grounds in the death of the husband at the time of second marriage afforded a good defence to the charge of bigamy.

Similarly, in Chiranji v. State, A father kills his own son believing in good faith, him to be a tiger. It was observed that a hunter mistakes a man for an animal and fires, here through a mistake a man intending to do a lawful act, has done that which is unlawful. There has not been that conjunction between his act and his will, which is necessary to form a criminal act. If there was no mens rea, there was a mistake. Therefore, it may be no crime.

19 March 2024
Question :- A promises to obtain for B an employment in public service and B promises to pay Rs. 1,000 to A. B secures the employment but fails to pay Rs. 1,000 to A. Can A recover Rs. 1,000 from B? If yes, why?

Answer:- Section 23 of Indian Contract Act provides that the consideration or object of an agreement is lawful unless the Court regards it an immoral or opposed to public policy.

The term Public Policy cannot be defined with any degree of precision. The certain class of acts are said to be against public policy or against the policy of law when the law refuses to enforce or recognise them on the ground that they have mischievous tendency so as to be injurious to the interest of State of public. Giving or agreeing to give bribe for securing public office is against public policy. Therefore, in case in hand agreement between A and B is void on the ground of being against public policy under Section 23 of the Act

Thus, A cannot recover Rs. 1,000 from B.

18 March 2024
Question :- A, was driving a bus on a Kacha Road at high speed. There was iron sheets placed on the top of the bus. On the way some of the iron sheets fell down on the head of B and also injured few other persons walking on the road. B was carried to the hospital by A. B died after a month. Has 'A' committed any offence?

Answer:- Section 304A of Indian Penal Code provides that Whoever causes the death of any person, by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine or both.

In order to apply Section 304 A the following conditions must be fulfilled-

  • • the death of any person must have been caused by accused by doing any rash and negligent act. In other words there must be proof that the rash and negligent act of accused was the proximate cause of the death.
  • • There must be direct nexus between the death of a person and the rash and negligent act of the accused.

In the case in hand, the accused drove the bus on a kacha road at a high speed. Further, the iron sheets were placed on the top of the bus without taking any precaution to avoid their fall. Therefore, driving the bus at a high speed on such a path and not taking of precaution while placing iron sheets on the top of the bus amount to criminal rashness and negligence. B died due to injuries received by him on being hit on his head with the iron sheets. Therefore, there is a direct nexus between the death of B and the rash and negligent act of A. Hence, A is guilty under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code.

16 March 2024
Question :- Who are the persons competent to transfer under the Transfer of Property Act?

Answer:- Section 7 of the Transfer of Property Act provides that “Every person competent to contract and entitled to transferable property or authorized to dispose of transferable property not his own, is competent to transfer such property either wholly or in part and either absolutely or conditionally, in the circumstances, to the extent and in the manner, allowed prescribed by any laws for the time being in force.”

In Balai Chandra Mondal v. Indu Rekha Devi, 1973, it was observed that a person's conduct in collecting rents and managing an estate of the landlord does not empower him to transfer the land as the landlord's agent.

Section 7 of the Act does not deal with the question as to who can be transferee of property. Section 6(b) provides that no transfer can be made to a person legally disqualified to be transferee. According to that provision, a minor is not disqualified to be transferee although a contract with a minor is void. Under Section 7 there is nothing which prevents a person not competent to contract from being transferee of property. It means that if a minor enter into contract through guardian or next friend he can be purchaser or mortgagee, otherwise not.

15 March 2024
Question :- What is Riot and distinguish between Riot and Affray?

Answer:- Section 146 of Indian Penal Code defines offence of Rioting as Whenever force or violence is used by an unlawful assembly or by any member thereof, in prosecution of the common object of such assembly, every member of such assembly is guilty of the offence of rioting.

Section 159 has defined offence Affray as When two or more persons by fighting in a public place, disturb the public peace, they are said to commit any affray.

The following are the differences between Riot and Affray-

  • (1) An affray cannot be committed in a private place. But it is to be noted that a riot may take place anywhere, i.e., both at a public and a private place
  • (2) An affray can be committed by two or more persons but a riot can be committed by at least five persons
  • (3) Rioters are those who first constitute an unlawful assembly but it is not so in case of an affray
  • (4) The punishment awarded in the case of riot is imprisonment for two years but in the case of an affray it is one month or fine up to Rs. 100 or both
14 March 2024
Question :- A and B are friends. B treats A during A's illness. B does not accept payment from A for treatment and A promises B's son X to pay him Rs. 1,000. A being in poor circumstances, is unable to pay. X sues A for the money. Decide?

Answer:- The general rule of law of contract is that an agreement without consideration is void.Section 25 of Indian Contract Act provides that:

An agreement made without consideration is void unless

  • (1) It is expressed in writing and registered under the law for the time being in force for the registration of documents and is made on account of natural love and affection between parties standing in a near relation to each other or unless
  • (2) It is a promise to compensate, wholly or in part, a person who has already voluntarily done something which the promisor was legally compellable to do or unless
  • (3) It is a promise, made in writing and signed by the person to be charged therewith, or by his agent generally or specially authorised in that behalf, to pay wholly or in part a debt of which the creditor might have enforced payment but for the law for the limitation of suits.

In any of these cases, such an agreement is a contract.

In the case in hand, A was treated during his illness by his friend B. Further, B has refused to accept any payment for such professional services rendered by him to A. In other words, this act of B was voluntary and gratuitous. It is also important to note that after treatment, A never made any promise to compensate B within the meaning of Section 23(2) of the Act. However, A promised B's son X, to pay him Rs. 1,000. For this promise, there was no consideration at all. Therefore, the promise with X being without consideration does not create any legal obligation, and is void.

13 March 2024
Question :- In a memorandum of partnership among A, B and C, it is provided that A will manage the business and will be paid Rs. 2000 P.M. but shall have no share in profits of the firm. In a suit for dissolution, A declines any liability for losses and asserts that he was not partner in the firm. Determine the validity of plea raised by him?

Answer:- Section 4 of Indian Partnership Act defines `Partnership as:

Partnership is a relation between persons who have agreed to share profits of the business to be carried on by all or any of them acting for all.

Section 4 makes it clear that the following essentials must exist to form partnership-

  • (a) There must be an agreement
  • (b) Agreement must be to share profits of the business
  • (c) Business must be carried on by all or any of them acting for all

It is to be noted that an agreement of sharing profits of the business is one of essential element of partnership. Moreover Section 6 of Partnership Act says

In determining whether a group of persons is or is not a firm or whether a person is or is not partner in a firm, regard shall be had to real relation between the parties as shown by all relevant facts taken together.

Explanation II to Section 6 makes it clear that receipt by a person of share of profit as remuneration, does not of itself make the receiver a partner in the firm.

In the case in hand, A has been shown a partner in the partnership deed and 'A' manages the business of firm and paid Rs. 2000 P.M. However, A shall have no share in profits of firm. The evidence taken together shows that when he is not entitled to share profits of the firm, he cannot be said to be partner in the firm because sharing profits of the firm is one of the essential condition for partnership relation. A at the most can be called Manager of business of the firm taking salary of Rs. 2000/-.

Therefore, A's plea that he is not partner and as such not liable for losses is sustainable.

12 March 2024
Question :- ‘A’ with the intention to kill B, gives him poisoned apple, but ‘B’ passes it to ‘C’ a child who eats and die. Discuss the criminal liability of ‘A’?

Answer:- Section 301 of Indian Penal Code provides that if a person by doing anything which he intends or knows to be likely to cause death commits culpable homicide by causing death of any person whose death he neither intends nor knows himself to be likely to cause the culpable homicide committed by the offender is of the description of which it would have been if he had caused the death of the person whose death he intended or knew himself to be likely to cause.

Section 301 I.P.C. embodies the doctrine of transfer of malice or transmigration of motive. The basic idea behind the provision is that where an act is in itself criminal the doing of the act is an offence irrespective of the individuality of the person harmed.

In Jagpal Singh v. State of Punjab, 1991, accused when aims at one and kills another, he would be punishable for murder under the doctrine of transfer of malice as embodied in Section 301 of the Indian Penal Code.

Therefore in problem in hand, A is guilty of murder.

11 March 2024
Question :- What do you understand by discharge of contract? Discuss when a contract stands discharged?

Answer:- Every Contract create certain right in favour of one party to it and certain obligation upon other party and each party is to perform this part of obligation. When each party fulfils his promise, the contract is said to be discharged.


The following are the ways by which a contract is said to be discharged-
  • 1. By Performance As stated above when each party to contract perform its part of promise, then contract is discharged and each party is satisfied. Section 37 and 38 of Indian Contract Act lays down the rules as to performance of contract.
  • 2. By Breach of Contract When a party having duty to perform a contract fails to do that or does an act by which performance of contract by him becomes impossible or when he refuses to perform the contract, it is a breach of contract. When one party to contract commits breach of contract other party is discharged from performing his part of promise under the contract and he also becomes entitled to sue the party committing breach of contract for damages for loss arisen due to breach of contract. Breach of contract may be-
    • • Actual i.e. refusal to performance of contract on date of performance
    • • Anticipatory i.e. refusal of performance of contract even before due date of performance
  • 3. Discharge by Impossibility of Performance When the performance of contract become impossible because of certain reasons beyond the control of either party to contract then each party to it, stands discharged from performing their part of promise under the contract. Section 56 of Indian Contract Act deals with impossibility of performance of Contract which is also known as Doctrine of frustration.
    As per section 56 there can be two kind of impossibility-
    • • Impossibility existing at the time of making of contract
    • • Impossibility of performance which become so, after contract was entered into, due to some supervening event.
  • 4. By Waiver and Novation etc. Parties create contract by their agreement and in the same way, by their agreement, the parties may bring a contract to an end. This type of ending of the contracts is known as the discharge of the contract by agreement.
    The discharge of the contract by agreement may be in any one of the following ways-
    • (a) By Waiver
    • (b) By Novation
    • (c) By alteration in terms of contract
09 March 2024
Question :- Difference between Limitation and Acquiescence?

Answer:- The following are the differences between Limitation and Acquiescence-

  • 1. Limitation indicates towards the provision against which a suit cannot be filed in a court after the expiry of the prescribed time. Acquiescence refers to a position in which an objection is not raised by person against an act done by another person having a right to do so, provided that it is not inconsistent with the right of the former.
  • 2. The right of a person to file a suit or initiate a proceeding is extinguished after the expiry of period of time whereas Acquiescence is most wide in comparison to that because a consent is involved in it.
  • 3. The acquiescence can either be direct or indirect but it is not so in the case of limitation.
  • 4. The acquiescence is based on knowledge and conduct of the concerning party while it is not so in case of limitation.
  • 5. When acquiescence is proved a person who did so loses his right to file a suit in the court irrespective of the fact that the time for filing a suit has since expired or not.
08 March 2024
Question :- A, B, C and D different motor owners agree to ply their motors between Delhi and Agra at a fixed fare and to divide the proceeds equally. Are A, B, C, and D partners?

Answer:- Section 4 of the Partnership Act defines Partnership as A relation between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all.

The following are the essentials conditions in order to determine whether partnership exists or not:-

  • • An agreement between the persons who want to be partners must exists
  • • The purpose of creating partnership should be carrying of business
  • • The main motive for creation of partnership should be sharing profits
  • • The business of the firm should be carried on by all of them or any of them acting for all i.e. mutual agency
According to Section 6 of the Partnership Act-

In determining whether a group of persons is or is not a firm or whether a person is or is not a partner in a firm, regard shall be had to real relation between the parties as shown by all relevant facts taken together.

Explanation 1 to Section 6 makes it clear that The sharing of profits or of gross returns arising from property by persons holding a joint or common interest in that property does not by itself make such persons partners.

In the given problem, A, B, C and D different motor owners though agreed to ply their respective motors between Delhi to Agra on fixed fare and to divide the proceeds equally but are not partners in view of Explanation 1 of Section 6.

Moreover, A, B, C and D do not possess all elements which are necessary to create partnership. Though they might have agreed to divide profits equally but they have not apparently agreed to carry business by all or any one of them acting for all. Thus, trade combination does not amount to partnership. Therefore, A, B, C and D are not partners.

07 March 2024
Question :- What is Forgery under the Indian Penal Code? Explain its essential ingredients?

Answer:- According to Section 463 of the Indian Penal Code, “Whoever makes any false document or false electronic record or part of a document or electronic record with intent cause damages or injury to the public or to any person or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property or to enter into any express or implied contract, or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.”

The ingredients of an offence of forgery are as follows:

  • (1) The making of a false document or part of it
  • (2) Such making should be with intent to-
    • • cause damage or injury to the public or to any person
    • • support any claim to title
    • • cause any person to part with property
    • • enter into any express or implied contract
    • • commit fraud or that fraud may be committed
For Example-

A signs his own name to a bill of exchange with an aim that it may be believed that another person of the same name drew the bill. A has committed forgery.

The offence of forgery has something to do with the making of a document. It is important to note that the making of a document is not an offence in itself. It will amount to an offence if the document or any part thereof is false. In other words, facts are contrary to what they appear in such writing or inscription. A false document must be coupled with a criminal intent to constitute the offence i.e. intent of a dishonest and fraudulent character.

Thus, it can be concluded that a criminal intention is the most important essential in proving an act of a forgery.

06 March 2024
Question :- What is a Wagering Agreement? Explain its essentials under the Indian Contract Act?

Answer:- A wager means a bet, the subject matter of the bet may be anything. It is a game of chance by which one will either gain or lose which is wholly dependent upon some future uncertain event.

According to Justice Hawkins - A wagering contract is one by which two persons, professing to hold opposite views touching the issue of future uncertain event, mutually agree that, dependent on the determination of that even, one shall win from the other and that other shall pay or hand over to him, a sum of money or other stakes, neither of the contracting parties have any other interest in that contract that the sum or stake so won or lost, there being no other real consideration for making of such contract by either of the parties. It is essential to a wagering contract that each party may, under it, either win or lose, whether he will win or lose being dependent on the issue of the event, and therefore, remaining uncertain until that issue is known. If either of the parties may win but cannot lose, or may lose but cannot win, it is not a wagering contract

Section 30 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 deals with wagering agreements. It provides -

“Agreement by way of wager, are void and no suit shall be brought, for recovering anything alleged to be won on any wager, or entrusted to any person to abide by the result of any game or other uncertain event on which any wager is made.”

The following are the essentials of Wagering Agreement-
  • (1) Opposite views about an uncertain event The first important essential is that the wagering agreement is that performance of it, depends upon an uncertain future event regarding which one party to it has one view and other party has opposite view.

    In Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball (1892) it was observed that parties should have opposite views touching the issue of a future uncertain even . Such opposite views could be in respect of past or present fact or event, only thing needed is that there should be uncertainty in the minds of parties about the determination of the event one way or other.
  • (2) Chances of gain or loss to the parties Another important essential of wager agreement is that parties to it should be at the risk of winning or losing money or money worth at the determination of some uncertain future event. Where there are no such chances of gain or loss, there is no wager.
  • (3) No other interest in the event except the amount of bet In wagering contract, neither of the contracting parties have any other interest in that contract than the sum nor stake he will so win or lose and there is no other real consideration for the making of such contract by either of the parties.
05 March 2024
Question :- X, Y and Z are joint owners of a property situated at Jaipur. X lives in Bombay, Y lives in Delhi and Z lives in Jaipur. In which court or courts can the suit for partition be filed? Give reasons.

Answer:- Section 16 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that suits relating to immovable property are to be instituted where the subject-matter is situated. Its proviso also provides that if the relief sought can be entirely obtained through the personal obedience of the defendant, the suit may be instituted either in the court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the defendant resides or carries on business, or personally woks for gain. Proviso to Section 16 C.P.C. will not be attracted in present case. X, Y and Z are joints owners, X lives in Bombay, Y lives in Delhi and Z lives at Jaipur. Therefore, in the case in hand suit for partition of property can be filed at Jaipur, i.e. where the suit property is situated.

04 March 2024
Question :- A asked B to help him in committing murder of C. B agrees but nothing is subsequently done in pursuance of such an agreement. Can A and B be charged with offence of conspiracy?

Answer:- Section 120A of Indian Penal Code defines Criminal Conspiracy as:
When two or more persons agree to do or cause to be done-

  • • an illegal act
  • • 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 criminal conspiracy unless some act besides the agreement is done by one or more parties to such agreement in pursuance thereof.
The following are the essentials of Criminal Conspiracy-

  • (1) There must be an agreement between two or more persons who are alleged to conspire
  • (2) The agreement should be to do, or cause to be done-
    • • an illegal act
    • • an act which is though not illegal by illegal means

In accordance with the proviso, the distinction is drawn between an agreement to commit an offence and an agreement of which either object or means employed are illegal but does not constitute the offence. In case of an agreement to commit offence mere agreement is sufficient but in case of an agreement to do an act which would not amount to an offence, some overt act besides the agreement must be proved to establish the charge of criminal conspiracy.

In the given problem, A and B reached to an agreement to commit the murder of C, which is offence, so in this case, it is sufficient to prove that A and B made agreement to commit offence of murder of C, even though no overt act subsequently done by either A or B. Offence of criminal conspiracy is committed.

02 March 2024
Question :- What are the modes of dissolution of Partnership?

Answer:- A firm may be dissolved in the following ways:

  • 1. Dissolution by agreement (Section 40) A firm may be dissolved either:
    • • With the consent of all the partners
    • • In accordance with a contract between the partners
    As partners can create partnership by making a contract as between themselves, they are also similarly free to end this relationship and thereby dissolve the firm by their mutual consent. When all the partners so agree they may dissolve the firm at any time they like.
  • 2. Compulsory dissolution (Section 41) Section 41 mentions certain events on the happening of which there is compulsory dissolution of the firm. According to Section 41, Compulsory dissolution occurs under following circumstances:
    • • When all the partners or all except one are adjudicated insolvent, the firm is compulsorily dissolved.
    • • If the business of the firm though lawful when the firm came into existence, subsequently becomes unlawful there has to be dissolution of the firm.
    If the firm was carrying on more than one adventures or undertakings the illegality of one or more of them shall not of itself result in the dissolution of the firm in respect of those adventures or undertakings which are still lawful. There is also compulsory dissolution of the firm if some event happens because of which it becomes unlawful for the partners to continue as partners with each other.
  • 3. Dissolution on happening of certain contingencies (Section 42) Section 42 mentions certain contingencies on the happening of which the firm is dissolved unless there is a contract to the contrary. Unlike the dissolution under Section 41, which is compulsory, the dissolution contemplated under Section 42 is not compulsory. Even on the happening of the contingencies mentioned in Section 42, partners may agree that the firm will not be dissolved but the business of the firm will be continued as before. The contingencies mentioned in the section are:
    • • Expiration of the partnership term
    • • Completion of the adventure
    • • Death of a partner
    • • Insolvency of a partner
  • 4. Dissolution by notice in partnership at will (Section 43) When the partnership is at will as defined in Section 7, the partners are not bound to remain as partners or continue the partnership for any fixed period. According to Section 43 such a firm may be dissolved by any partner giving notice in writing to all the other partners of his intention to dissolve the firm. The notice must clearly and in unambiguous terms indicate the intention of the partner giving notice to dissolve the firm. Dissolution by a notice under this section will be valid even though one of the partners to whom the notice is given is insane.
  • 5. Dissolution by the Court Section 44 mentions certain grounds on which a suit can be filed for the dissolution of a firm. The provision is as follows: At the suit of a partner, the Court may dissolve a firm on any of the following grounds namely
    • (a) That a partner has become of unsound mind in which case the suit may be brought as well by the next friend of the partner who has become of unsound mind as by any other partner
    • (b) That a partner, other than the partner suing, has become in any way permanently incapable of performing his duties as partner
    • (c) that a partner, other than the partner suing, is guilty of conduct which is likely to affect prejudicially the carrying on of the business, regard being had to the nature of the business
    • (d) That a partner, other than the partner suing, wilfully or persistently commits breach of agreement relating to the management of the affairs of the firm or the conduct of its business, or otherwise so conducts himself in matters relating to the business that it is not reasonably practicable for the other partners to carry on the business in partnership with him
    • (e) That a partner, other than the partner suing, has in any way transferred the whole of his interest in the firm to a third party, or has allowed his share to be charged under the provisions of Rule 49 of Order XXI of the First Schedule to the Code of the Civil Procedure, 1908 or has allowed it to be sold in the recovery of arrears of land revenue or of any dues recoverable as arrears of land revenue due by the partner
    • (f) That the business of the firm cannot be carried on save at a loss
    • (g) On any other ground which renders it just and equitable that the firm should be dissolved
01 March 2024
Question :- A contracts to sell B all the grain that may be produced in his farm. The entire crop is damaged due to failure of rain. Who shall suffer the loss?

Answer:- Sections 7 and 8 of Sales of Goods Act deals with the effect of goods being perished in case of contract of sale or in case of agreement to sell.

Section 7 of the Sales of Goods Act lays down:

"Where there is a contract for sale of specified goods the contract is void if the goods without the knowledge of the seller have, at the time when the contract was made, perished or become so damaged as no longer to answer to their description in the contract."

Section 8 of Sales of Goods Act lays down:

"Where there is an agreement to sell specific goods and subsequently the goods without any fault on the part of the seller or buyer perishes or becomes so damaged as no longer to answer to their description in the agreement before the risk passes to the buyer the agreement is thereby avoided."

So, Section 8 of Act is applicable when the goods to be sold are specific and there is merely an agreement to sell.

The question involved in the present case is that whether agreement to sell the grain that may be produced on his farm, is specific or unascertained?

In Howell v. Coupland (1876), the Department in the month of March agreed to sell to plaintiff 200 tons of potatoes, grown in land belonging to Defendant at particular price and to be delivered in the month of October. Defendant had 68 acres of land which was sown, but without fault on the part of the defendant, in August, the crop was attacked by the potato disease and defendant could not deliver the whole quantity of product. In this case it was observed that & This is not like the case of contract to deliver so many goods of particular kind, where no specific goods are sold. Here, there was an agreement to sell and buy particular crop to be grown on specific land. It is an agreement to sell specific things and therefore, neither party is liable, if the performance becomes impossible.

Thus, it can be concluded that in accordance with Section 8 of the Sales of Goods Act, the agreement is void and A has to suffer the loss.

29 Feb 2024
Question :- What are those irregularities which do not vitiate the proceedings under the Criminal Procedure Code?

Answer:- Section 460 Cr.P.C. deals with irregularities which do not vitiate proceedings. Section 460 states & If any Magistrate not empowered by law to do any of the following things, namely,

  • (a) to issue a search-warrant under Section 94
  • (b) to order, under Section 155, the police to investigate an offence
  • (c) to hold an inquest under Section 176
  • (d) to issue process under Section 187, for the apprehension of a person within his local jurisdiction who has committed an offence outside the limits of such jurisdiction
  • (e) to take cognizance of an offence under clause (a) or clause (b) of Sub-section (1) of Section 190
  • (f) to make over a case under Sub-section (2) of Section 192
  • (g) to tender a pardon under Section 306
  • (h) to recall a case and try it himself under Section 410
  • (i) to sell property under Section 458 or Section 459, erroneously in good faith does that thing, his proceedings shall not be set aside merely on the ground of his not being so empowered.
28 Feb 2024
Question :- A is attacked by mob which attempts to kill him. A in exercise of his right of private defence fires at the mob, killing one of the several children mingled with the mob. What offence if any committed by A?

Answer:- Section 106 of the Indian Penal Code provides that & if in the exercise of the right of private defence against an assault which reasonably 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.

In the case in hand, A was attacked by a mob who attempted to murder him. He cannot effectually exercise his right of private defence without firing on the mob, and he cannot fire without risk of harming young children who are mingled with the mob. A commits no offence when by so firing he harms or kills any of the children.

27 Feb 2024
Question :- The question is whether A murdered B. During investigation of the case, X said in presence of A “The police is coming to arrest the man who murdered B.” A, hearing these words of X immediately ran away. Is the statement of X is relevant?

Answer:- Section 8 of the Evidence Act provides that the conduct of any person an offence against whom is the subject of any proceeding, is relevant, if such conduct influences or is influenced by any fact in issue or relevant fact, and whether it was previous or subsequent thereto. Explanation 2 to the Section 8 provides that when the conduct of any person is relevant, any statement made to him or in his presence and hearing, which affects such conduct, is relevant. Thus, the conduct of the accused soon after the incident plays an important part in determining the guilt of the accused and is a corroborative piece of evidence. The conduct of a person in absconding after the commission of the offence is an evidence to show that he was connected to the offence. It may be clarified that absconding is equally consistent with innocence and guilt.

Illustration (f) to Section 8 of the Act.-

The question is, whether A robbed B?

The facts that, after B was robbed, C said in A's presence - "the police are coming to look for the man who robbed B", and that immediately afterwards A ran away, are relevant.

Therefore, in the present case the statement made by X and the conduct of A in running away are relevant under section 8 of the Evidence Act.

24 Feb 2024
Question :- A dacoity was committed in Punjab, the dacoits were arrested in Delhi and the looted property was recovered from a goldsmith at Pune. State with reasons which of the Court shall have jurisdiction to try the case?

Answer:- Section 181(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that any offence of being a thug, or murder committed by a thug, of dacoity with murder, of belonging to a gang of dacoits, or of escaping from custody, may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local jurisdiction the offence was committed or the accused person is found. In the present case, the offence of dacoity was committed at Punjab and the dacoits were arrested at Delhi. Therefore, the offence of dacoity can be inquired into or tried either at Punjab or Delhi.

23 Feb 2024
Question :- What is an Interpleader Suit? State the relevant conditions under which an interpleader suit can be instituted?

Answer:- An interpleader suit is a suit in which the real dispute is not between the plaintiff and the defendant but between the defendants only and the plaintiff is not really interested in the subject- matter of the suit. In other words, in an interpleader suit, the defendants interplead, i.e., plead against each other instead of pleading against the plaintiff as in an ordinary suit.
Section 88 of CPC provides that where two or more persons claim adversely to one another the same debt, sum of money or other property, movable or immovable, from another person who does not claim any interest in it except the charges or costs and is ready to pay or deliver it to the rightful claimant, such person may file an interpleader suit.
For Example-
E is in possession of the property claimed by A and D adversely. E does not claim any interest in the property and is ready to deliver it to the rightful owner, he can file an interpleader suit.
The following conditions must be satisfied before an interpleader suit can be instituted -

  • • there must be some debt, sum of money or other property movable or immovable in dispute
  • • two or more persons must be claiming it adversely to one another
  • • the person from whom such debt, money or property is claimed, must not be claiming any interest therein other than the charges and costs and he must be ready to pay or deliver it to the rightful claimant
  • • there must be no suit pending in which the rights of the rival claimants can be property decided

Thus, it is clear that an interpleader suit is actually between the defendants. The plaintiff cannot claim any interest in the subject matter of such suit except the charges and the costs as admissible to him under the law.

22 Feb 2024
Question :- What considerations and objects are lawful and what not under the Indian Contract Act?

Answer:- According to Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, if the consideration or object of the agreement is not lawful such agreements are void ab initio. Even the agreements of which the object or consideration in part is unlawful, the agreement as a whole is void ab initio as per Section 24 of the Act. Therefore, it is necessary to know as what considerations and objects are lawful and what not. Section 23 specifically lays down the consideration or object of an agreement as lawful unless it is:

  • 1. Forbidden by law
    An agreement to do something which is expressly forbidden by law is void. In Brij Mohan v. Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corp., 1987, an agreement by corporation with private vehicle owner allowing him to operate his vehicles under the permit obtained by State Corporation was held to be void being violative of provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act.
  • 2. Defeat the provisions of any law
    If the object or consideration of an agreement is to defeat any provision of law then such agreement is void because such object of any agreement can never be lawful. In Ram Sewak v. Ram Charan, 1982, the parties agreed to carry on business in partnership. Agreement provided that they would conceal some part of their business activity and would not enter certain items in the books of accounts with a view to evade Income tax and sales tax. One of the partners brought an action against others for accounts and recovery of due amount. It was held that such agreement was aimed to defeat the provisions of Tax Laws and thus, cannot be enforced.
  • 3. Fraudulent purpose
    If the object of any contract is to defraud some person or to take undue advantage by fraudulent transaction then such contract is void.
  • 4. Agreement injurious to person or property
    If the object or consideration of an agreement is to cause an injury to the person or property of another, then such agreement is unlawful and thus, void.
  • 5. Immoral or against public policy
    If the consideration or object of an agreement is regarded by the court to be immoral or opposed to public policy, then such agreement is unlawful. Hence, the agreement is void as per Section 23 of the Act.

Thus, in each of these cases, the consideration or object of an agreement is said to be unlawful. Every agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful is void.

21 Feb 2024
Question :- A flew away with an aeroplane without the permission of authorities. However, he restored the aeroplane at its place a day after. State with reasons, what offence, if any, has been committed by A?

Answer:- Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code defines theft as-
“Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable 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.”
The following are the essentials of the offence of theft-

  • • Dishonest intention to take property;
  • • Property should be moveable;
  • • The property must be taken out of possession of another person;
  • • Property should be taken without the person’s consent;
  • • Property should be moved, in order to such taking

For Example-
A finds a ring on a table in Z’s house. The ring belongs to Z as it is in his possession. If A removes that ring without Z’s consent. A commits theft.

In Pyare Lal Bhargava vs. the State of Rajasthan, 1963, it was held that removing of a file from the office and giving it to a third person who is not an employee, for personal profit, constitutes the offence of theft. It is immaterial, for what duration or time period the file was moved. The moment a thing is moved from its place with dishonest intention, out of a person’s possession, without his consent, establishes the offence of theft.

In K. N. Mehera v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1957 SC 369, it was held that absence of the person’s consent at the time of moving and the presence of dishonest intention in so taking at the time of moving and the presence of dishonest intention in so taking at the time are essential ingredients of theft.

In the given problem, the accused A, who flew the aeroplane without the permission of authorities has caused loss to the authority due to deprivation or dispossession. Here, the accused A has committed an offence of theft as defined under Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code. It is important to note that it is immaterial that he intended to return the aeroplane at later point of time.

20 Feb 2024
Question :- Distinguish between Cheating and Criminal Breach of trust under the Indian Penal Code?

Answer:- Section 415 and Section 405 of the Indian Penal code deals with the offences of Cheating and Criminal Breach of trust. Both these offences are committed against the property. The following are the differences between the two-

  • 1. Cheating primarily involves fraudulent inducement or performing an act based on false representations or concealment of facts. It focuses on the act of inducing someone through dishonest means. On the other hand, Criminal breach of trust, revolves around the abuse of trust or breach of fiduciary obligations. It occurs when a person, who is entrusted with property or dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts it for their own use or the benefit of someone else.
  • 2. Cheating requires fraudulent intent on the part of the offender. They must have the intention to deceive and induce the victim to act upon their false representations. Whereas, in case of Criminal breach of trust, the emphasis is on the dishonest misappropriation or conversion of entrusted property by a person who was in a position of trust.
  • 3. Cheating is committed against immovable property only. On the other hand, Criminal breach of trust is committed against movable or immovable property.
  • 4. Cheating generally involves causing wrongful gain to the offender or others, or causing wrongful loss to the victim. The gain or loss is a direct result of the fraudulent inducement. On the other hand, Criminal breach of trust primarily entails the misappropriation or conversion of entrusted property, resulting in wrongful loss to the person to whom the property belongs or was entrusted.
19 Feb 2024
Question :- What are the secondary sources of Muslim Law?

Answer:- The following are the secondary sources of Muslim Law-

  • 1. Customs
    The Customs are termed as urf in the Muslim law. It was never recognized as a source of law but was considered supplementary. It is important to note that not every custom holds importance in Muslim law.
    The following are the requisites of valid customs under Muslim law are:
    • ✔️ It must be ancient
    • ✔️ It must be territorial
    • ✔️ It must be continuous
    • ✔️ It must not oppose the public policy
    • ✔️ It must not oppose the Quran or Ijma
  • 2. Judicial Decisions
    Judicial decisions are the decisions given by the Privy Council, the Supreme Court and the High Courts of India. Judicial decisions acts as precedents for future cases. Judicial decisions are supplementary to Muslim law.
  • 3. Legislation
    Muslims are governed by various legislations passed by many legislatures, which have considerably supplemented the Muslim law. For example-
    • • Guardian and Wards Act, 1890
    • • Shariat Act, 1937
    • • Muslim Women Protection of Right and Divorce Act, 1986
  • 4. Justice, Equity and Good conscience
    One of the origins of Muslim law is the idea of fairness, justice, equity, and excellent conciseness. These Islamic legal doctrines are known as ‘Istihsan’ or ‘Juristic Equity.

Therefore, the secondary sources of Muslim Law are those sources that are advancements in the establishment set somewhere around the primary sources. These sources are not essential sources of Muslim law but rather the strengthening source of Muslim law.

17 Feb 2024
Question :- What are the Primary sources of Muslim Law?

Answer:- The Muslim law has been derived from various primary sources which are as follows-

  • 1. The Quran Quran is the supreme source of Muslim law as it is believed to contain the verses of God himself. It specifies the moral, philosophical, social, political and economic basis on which a society should be constructed.
  • 2. Sunna or Traditions Sunna is the second primary source of Muslim law. Sunna can be defined as the path encompassing the practices, traditions, and precedents set by Prophet Mohammed. Sunna or traditions consists of the following:
    • • Sunnat-ul-Qual (Words spoken by Prophet)
    • • Sunnat-ul-Fail (Conduct of Prophet)
    • • Sunnat-ul-Tahrir (Silence by Prophet)
  • 3. Ijma The third primary source of the Muslim law is Ijma which means the consensus of opinion among the learned of the community. Thus, it refers to the concurrent opinions of scholars on legal questions, which acquires a form of law. There are three kinds of Ijma:
    • • Ijma of Companions: The concurrent opinion of the companions of Prophet was considered as the most authoritative which could not be overruled or modified.
    • • Ijma of the Jurists: This was the unanimous decision of the jurists.
    • • Ijma of the people or masses: It is the opinion of the majority of the Muslims which was accepted as law.
  • 4. Qiyas Qiyas is the fourth and last primary source of the Muslim law. Qiyas is the analogy from the Quran, the Sunnat and the Ijma. Qiyas does not purport to create new law but applies the old principles to the new circumstances.

Therefore, the primary sources of the Muslim law are based on religious and spiritual values and is of great value and importance.

16 Feb 2024
Question :- Difference between Res Judicata and Res sub Judice?

Answer:- The differences between Res Judicata and Res Sub Judice are as follows-

  • 1. Res Judicata means a matter which is already decided and cannot be heard again whereas Res Sub judice signifies that the matter is still being heard in the court.
  • 2. Res Judicata is mentioned under Section 11 of the Civil Procedure Code whereas Res sub judice is dealt under Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code.
  • 3. The main objective of Res Judicata is to prevent a second trial of the formerly settled disputes. On the other hand, Res sub judice prohibit parallel proceedings between the same parties.
  • 4. In case of Res Judicata, the previously instituted suit must be decided by the competent court in which the issue has been raised subsequently. On the other hand, Res Sub Judice in which the previously instituted suit must be pending in the same court or any competent court having jurisdiction.
  • 5. Res Judicata is applicable to suit and applications whereas Res sub judice is applicable only to suits including appeals.

Thus, the main difference between the Res Judicata and Res Sub Judice lie in their applicability, conditions and exceptions. Res Judicata is applicable when a case has reached a final decision while Res Sub Judice is relevant when a case is still pending before a court.

15 Feb 2024
Question :- Difference between DPSP and Fundamental Rights?

Answer:- The following is the difference between DPSP and Fundamental rights-

Basis Fundamental Rights DPSP’s
Provision Part III of the Constitution of India contains the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the citizens of India. (Articles 12-35) Part IV of the Constitution contains the DPSP. (Articles 36-51)
Provision Part III of the Constitution of India contains the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the citizens of India. (Articles 12-35) Part IV of the Constitution contains the DPSP. (Articles 36-51)
Meaning Basic rights that are guaranteed to Indian citizens by the Constitution are Fundamental Rights DPSPs are the guidelines to be followed by the Government while framing policies.
Democracy Political Democracy is established in India that is to the people, for the people and by the people. Economic and Social Democracy is established with the help of the DPSPs.
Goal The welfare of each and every citizen is promoted The welfare of the entire community is fostered
Penalty Infringement of FR is punishable DPSP’s violation is not punishable as these are guidelines to the govt.
Enforceability Fundamental Rights are justiciable as they can be enforced legally by the courts in cases of a violation. Directive Principles are not justiciable as the courts cannot enforce them in cases of a violation.
Power of the court If there is a law which is in violation of fundamental rights then the courts can declare it as unconstitutional. If there is a law in violation of Directive Principles, then the courts do not have the power to declare it as unconstitutional.
Suspension Fundamental rights can be suspended during a national emergency except for Arts. 20 & 21. Directive Principles of State Policy can never be suspended under any circumstances.
Borrowed from Fundamental Rights was borrowed from the USA’s Constitution. Directive Principles of State Policy was borrowed from the Irish Constitution.

Thus, Fundamental Rights confer individual rights and freedoms whereas DPSP provides a roadmap for the state to ensure social and economic justice, promote the welfare of the people and create a just society. The relationship between the two involves balancing and harmonising their objectives to achieve a balanced constitutional framework.

14 Feb 2024
Question :- What is Temporary Injunctions and state the conditions under which temporary injunction can be granted?

Answer:- A temporary injunction is a court order that is given while a case is ongoing to keep things the way they are until the case is finally decided. Its main purpose is to stop someone from causing serious harm to another party during the legal process.
The temporary injunction is granted by the Court when the Defendant is about to the make some injury to the property of the Plaintiff or threatens the Plaintiff to dispossess the property or creates a third party interest in the property, then in such condition the Court may grant a temporary injunction to restrain the Defendant to do such an act or issue order to prevent the dispossession of the plaintiff or prevent the causing of injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute or creating any third party rights in the property.
Order XXXIX Rule 1 enumerated various grounds for which an order of injunction may be issued. The following are the conditions under which temporary injunction can be granted-

  • • Where a property in dispute exists and there lies a risk that it will be damaged, wasted or alienated by any party to the suit or be sold in execution of a decree.
  • • Where a defendant intends to or threatens to dispose off or sell the property to defraud its creditors.
  • • Where a defendant is about to commit a breach of contract.
  • • Where a defendant threatens to dispose the property or cause injury to the plaintiff in relation to any property in dispute in the suit.
  • • Where the court is of the opinion that a just and equitable ground exists.

Therefore, it can be concluded that a temporary injunction is an order issued by the Court that temporarily restrains a party from taking specific actions or compels them to do certain things for a limited period until a final decision is passed. The grant of temporary injunction cannot be demanded by the party as a question of right nor can be rejected by the Court subjectively.

13 Feb 2024
Question :- What are the salient features of Indian Constitution?

Answer:- The following are the features of Constitution of India-

  • 1. Written and Lengthiest Constitution:
    In 1949, the Indian constitution was adopted; originally it consisted of 395 Articles divided into 22 parts and 9 schedules. Presently, after 105 amendments, it consists of 448 Articles, divided into 25 parts and 12 schedules, which is considered as the longest written constitution in the world and is described as an elephant size living constitution.
  • 2. Federal System:
    The Constitution of India has not used the term federal state and has described India as a Union of States. It establishes a federal system of government, with the powers divided between the Central Government and the State Governments. However, the Constitution of India consists of unitary features, such as a strong central government and a single constitution for the entire nation.
  • 3. Parliamentary Democracy:
    India has a Parliamentary form of government which has been borrowed from the British Constitution. Under the Parliamentary form of government, the President is the nominal head of the state and Prime Minister is the head of the government.
  • 4. Fundamental Rights and Duties:
    Fundamental Rights are one of the most important features of the Indian Constitution under Part III. The Constitution has divided Fundamental Rights into six broad categories (Article 14 to 35). Fundamental Rights are justiciable and are protected by the judiciary. In case of violation of any of these rights one has a right to move to the High Court under Article 226 as well as the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution for the enforcement of their rights. Fundamental Duties were added to the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment. Presently, there are 11 fundamental duties for all citizens after 86th Constitutional amendment Act of 2002.
  • 5. Independent Judiciary:
    Indian judiciary is an independent and impartial in nature. The Supreme Court of India is the highest Court of Appeal, a guarantor of fundamental rights, and the protector of the Constitution.
  • 6. Universal Adult Franchise:
    Indian democracy functions on the basis of one person one vote. The Indian Constitution provides for universal adult suffrage, with every citizen of the country above the age of 18 having the right to vote.
  • 7. Single Citizenship:
    The Indian Constitution provides for a single citizenship for the entire country, which means that every citizen of India enjoys the same rights and privileges irrespective of the state they belong to.
  • 8. Emergency Provisions:
    The Indian Constitution provides for emergency provisions, which can be invoked in case of a threat to the security of the country or the democratic system of government. There are three types of emergencies under the Constitution of India-
    • ✔️ National emergency wherein emergency is caused by war, external aggression or armed rebellion
    • ✔️ State Emergency which arises out of the failure of constitutional machinery in states
    • ✔️ Financial emergency

    Thus, it can be concluded that Constitution is a living document and its horizons are ever expanding. It is the supreme law of land that lays down the framework of governance and defines the rights, powers and duties of the government and the citizens of the country.

    12 Feb 2024
    Question :- Difference between Judicial Separation and Divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?

    Answer:- The following are the differences between Judicial Separation and Divorce-

    • 1. Judicial Separation means suspension of conjugal rights or marital obligations without the dissolution of marriage while divorce is the process where the marriage formally comes to an end.
    • 2. Judicial Separation is dealt under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 whereas Divorce is mentioned under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
    • 3. Judicial separation can be filed at any time after the marriage but in case of divorce, it can only be filed after completion of 1 year of marriage.
    • 4. Under Judicial separation, right to inheritance remains enforced while in case of Divorce, right to inheritance ends with the passing of the decree for the divorce.
    • 5. In case of Judicial Separation, there is a possibility of reconciliation whereas in case of Divorce, there is no possibility of reconciliation.

    Thus, Judicial Separation refers to release from matrimonial duties or obligation for certain period of time whereas Divorce is a legal process where the marriage is dissolved and both parties are no longer legally bound to each other. It is important to note that Judicial separation can be divorce but divorce can never be a judicial separation.

    10 Feb 2024
    Question :- What are the theories of Divorce under the Hindu Law?

    Answer:- The term ‘divorce’ derives from a Latin word ‘divortium’ which means ‘to turn aside’ or ‘to separate’. Divorce is the legal cessation of a matrimonial bond. All rights and mutual obligations of husband and wife ceases. There are three theories of divorce under Hindu Law-

    • 1. Fault or Guilt Theory
      Under the fault theory of divorce, if one party’s behaviour results in a matrimonial offence, the other party is entitled to seek dissolution of marriage from the guilty spouse. A divorce can only be granted based on certain grounds such as cruelty, rape, sodomy, desertion, etc. These grounds are mentioned under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Under this theory it is important that there must always be one guilty spouse and an innocent spouse.
      The Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 lays down nine grounds based on the guilt theory of divorce:
      • • Adultery
      • • Cruelty
      • • Desertion
      • • Insanity or mental disorder
      • • Conversion
      • • Venereal communicable disease
      • • Leprosy
      • • Renunciation
      • • Presumption of death
    • 2. Divorce by Mutual Consent
      The provision for dissolving marriage through mutual consent is provided under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. According to this theory, since two persons marry by their free will and they entered into a social contract of marriage, therefore, they should also be allowed to move out of the relationship by their own free will and dissolve their marriage.
    • 3. Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage
      According to this theory, if a marriage had broken down without any possibility of restoration then it should be dissolved. Where neither of the spouses can live peacefully together and acquire the benefits of a married relationship, then it is better to dissolve the marriage through mutual consent.

    Thus, the Hindu Marriage Act recognizes different theories of divorce under Hindu Law such as fault or guilt theory, mutual consent theory and irretrievable breakdown theory.

    09 Feb 2024
    Question :- What are the Modern Sources of Hindu Law?

    Answer:- The oldest existing legal system in the world is the Hindu system of jurisprudence. The authority from which the law has been derived is referred to as the source of Hindu law. It indicates the origins of Hindu law, and these sources are regarded as evidence of Hindu law.

    The following are the Modern Sources of Hindu Law-
    • a) Judicial Decisions:
      During British regime in the country Hindu law was administered by British judges with the help of Hindu Pandits because they interpreted the Sanskrit texts for them to apply them to the dispute and to arrive at a decision. So the decision of the higher courts become a law for the lower courts.
    • b) Legislation:
      Legislation is the modern source of Hindu law and has a colossal importance, in the evolution and development of Hindu law. The Hindu law has been reformed and modified by the legislature through various enactments in this regard. The British government itself passed certain acts with a view to bring some reforms in certain aspects of law. In post-independence era legislation of far reaching effects has revolutionized the law. Before the independence important legislations passed were:-
      • • The caste Disabilities Removal Act, 1850
      • • The Hindu Widow's Remarriage Act, 1856.
      • • Inheritance (Removal of Disabilities) Act, 1928
      • • The Indian Succession Act, 1925.
      • • The Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1928.
      • • The Hindu Women's Right to Property Act, 1937.
    • c) Equity, Justice and Good Conscience:
      In the absence of any specific law in the Smriti, or in the event of a conflict between the Smritis, the principles of justice, equity and good conscience would be applied. In other words, what would be most fair and equitable in the opinion of the Judge would be done in a particular case.

    Thus, these sources provide the foundation for the legal framework that governs various aspects of Hindu personal law.

    08 Feb 2024
    Question :- Difference between Wrongful restraint and Wrongful Confinement?

    Answer:- The following are the differences between Wrongful Restraint and Wrongful Confinement-

    • 1. According to Section 339 of the Indian Penal code, whoever voluntarily obstructs any person so as to prevent that person from proceeding in any direction in which that person has a right to proceed, is said to wrongfully restrain that person. On the other hand, wrongful confinement is defined under Section 340 of the Indian Penal Code, as whoever wrongfully restrains any person in such a manner as to prevent that person from proceedings beyond certain circumscribing limits is said to wrongfully confine that person.
    • 2. Wrongful restraint includes partial suspension of one’s liberty whereas Wrongful confinement is a complete suspension of one’s liberty beyond certain circumscribing.
    • 3. Wrongful Restraint is genus whereas Wrongful Confinement is a species of Wrongful Restraint.
    • 4. Wrongful restraint is not as serious as wrongful confinement whereas Wrongful Confinement is a serious offence.

    Thus, when a person is restrained from moving forward despite having the option to move back, left, or right, this is known as Wrongful Restraint. Wrongful confinement, on the other hand, encompasses a wide range of restrictions imposed over a period of time, such as the ban on leaving a room, building or park etc.

    07 Feb 2024
    Question :- What are the theories of Punishments under the Indian Penal Code?

    Answer:- The following are theories of punishments:

    • 1. Retribution
      This theory emphasizes that punishment should be proportionate to the offence committed. The idea is that the offender should suffer in the same way as the victim suffered, so as to restore the moral balance in society. In the Indian Penal Code, this theory is reflected in the principle of an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth in certain cases.
    • 2. Deterrence
      This theory aims to deter others from committing similar offences by imposing harsh punishments on the offenders. The idea is that the fear of punishment will prevent others from committing the same crime. This theory is reflected in the Indian Penal Code through the imposition of maximum sentences for certain offenses.
    • 3. Rehabilitation
      This theory emphasizes the reform and rehabilitation of offenders so that they can become responsible members of society. The idea is that offenders should be given opportunities to learn new skills and change their behaviour so that they can reintegrate into the society.
    • 4. Prevention
      This theory focuses on preventing crime by incapacitating offenders. This can be done through imprisonment or other forms of confinement, with an aim of keeping offenders away from society and preventing them from committing further crimes.
    • 5. Restoration
      This theory emphasizes the restoration of the harm caused by the offence. The idea is that the offender should be required to make amends for the harm caused to the victim either through compensation or through community services.

    Thus, it can be concluded that punishment is primarily used as a method of protecting society by reducing the occurrence of criminal behaviour.

    06 Feb 2024
    Question :- What are the Ancient Sources of Hindu Law?

    Answer:- The oldest existing legal system in the world is the Hindu system of jurisprudence. The authority from which the law has been derived is referred to as the source of Hindu law. It indicates the origins of Hindu law, and these sources are regarded as evidence of Hindu law.

    The following are the Ancient Sources of Hindu Law:
    • a) Shruti:
      Shruti, literally, means that what was heard, this word has been derived from the word 'Shru' i.e. to hear. Manu has defined Shruti as follows- By Shruti or what was heard from above (from God) is meant the Veda. Shruti or Vedas are believed to contain the very words of Deity (God). It is the paramount and primary sources of Hindu Law.
    • b) Smrities:-
      They are utterances and precepts of the Almighty, which have been heard and remembered and handed down by the Rishis (sages) from generation to generation. The smrities are divided into Primary and Secondary Smrities contained in-
      • ✔️ Dharma Sutra (Prose)
      • Gautama
      • Baudhyana
      • Apastamba
      • Harita
      • Vasistha
      • Vishnu
      • ✔️ Dharmashastras (Poetry)
      • Manu
      • Yajnyavalkya
      • Brihaspati
      • Narada
    • c) Commentaries:-
      After the Smrities, the next step in the development of Hindu Law was the composition of a number of commentaries (tika) and Digests (Nibandha) based upon the Smrities. The writing of a particular Smriti is called commentary while the writing on different smrities is called Digests.
    • d) Custom:-
      Customs are an important source of Hindu law as they reflect the social, cultural, and religious practices followed by Hindus in different regions of India. Customary law is based on long- established practices that have been recognized and followed by the community for a considerable period of time.

    Thus, the sources of Hindu law in India are ancient texts, customs, judicial precedents, and legislative enactments. These sources provide the foundation for the legal framework that governs various aspects of Hindu personal law.

    05 Feb 2024
    Question :- Define Sale? What are the essential elements of Sale?

    Answer:- According to Section 4(1) of the Sale of Goods Act 1930, a contract of sale of goods is a contract whereby the seller transfers or agrees to transfer the property in goods to the buyer for a price.

    The following are the essentials of a Contract of Sale-
    • 1. Bilateral Contract
      A sale must be between two different persons and the property has to pass on from one person to another person i.e. Buyer and Seller.
      In State of Gujarat v. Ramanlal Sons Co., a partnership firm was dissolved and the surplus assets including the stock in trade, were divided among the partners. The Court ruled that it wasn't a sale because the partners were both joint owners of the goods and couldn't be sellers and buyers at the same time.
      In Graff v. Evans, the accused was the manager of a club that used to supply intoxicating liquor to its members at a fixed price but the Club did not have a valid license to sell liquor. The accused was arrested for selling liquor to Club members in an illegal way. This was held not to be a sale.
    • 2. Goods
      The contract must include goods as its subject matter.
      According to Section 2(7) -
      Goods means “every kind of movable property other than actionable claims and money and includes stocks and share, growing crops, grass and things attached to or forming a part of the land which are agreed to be severed before sale or under the contract of sale.”
      For Example- A agreed to sell to B, wheat crops which is grown in his field. A & B agreed that B may cut the crop and take it away upon the payment of the price. As the growing crop is included in the term “goods”, this is a valid contract of sale.
    • 3. Price
      Another essential component of a contract of sale is that there must be some price for the goods. It means that the goods must be sold for some price.
      According to Section 2(10) -
      Price means “the money consideration for a sale of goods.”
      Thus, price is the consideration for contract of sale which should be in terms of money. If the ownership of the goods is transferred for any consideration other than the money, it will not amount to sale but an exchange. It is a consideration that can be paid partly in money and partly in goods.
    • 4. Transfer of Property
      The transfer of property must take place between the parties, i.e. the buyer must transfer the property he has in the goods to the seller in order to execute a contract of sale.
    03 Feb 2024
    Question :- Difference between Sale and Agreement to Sell?

    Answer:- The following are the differences between Sale and Agreement to Sell-

    In order to apply Section 56, the following conditions must be fulfilled-
    • 1. A contract of sale is the exchange of goods for consideration which takes place immediately. Transfer of possession and ownership is instant. On the other hand, an agreement to sell is the exchange of goods for a consideration in future at a specific time or after fulfilment of specific conditions.
    • 2. A contract of sale is a subject of various statutes including:
      • • Indian Contract Act, 1872
      • • Sale of Goods Act, 1930
      • • Transfer of Property Act, 1882
      On the other hand, an agreement to sell is mainly a subject of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930.
    • 3. The nature in the sale is absolute whereas the nature of the agreement to sell is conditional.
    • 4. In sale, title transfers with the execution whereas in agreement to sell, title remains with the seller until sale is executed.
    • 5. Under Sale, the right to sell remains with the buyer. On the other hand, under agreement to sell, the right to sell remains with the seller.

    Thus, it can be concluded that the major difference between sale and agreement to sell is that in a sale, ownership of goods transfers immediately from the seller to the buyer, with accompanying risks and benefits. In contrast, an agreement to sell sets the stage for a future transfer, conditional upon certain conditions.

    02 Feb 2024
    Question :- What is Evidence and what are the types of evidences?

    Answer:- The term Evidence is derived from the Latin term ‘evident’ or ‘evidere’ which means to show clearly, to discover, to ascertain or to prove. According to Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, evidence means and includes-

    In order to apply Section 56, the following conditions must be fulfilled-
    • • All such statements which the court allows or needs to be presented before it by the witnesses in connection to matters of fact under inquiry. These statements are termed as oral evidence.
    • • All such documents including any electronics record, presented before the court for inspection. These documents are termed as documentary evidence.

    According to Sir Taylor “Law of Evidence which branches out of the Law of the procedure means through argument to prove or disprove any matter of fact. The truth of which is submitted to judicial investigation.”
    The following are the types of evidences-

    • 1. Oral Evidence
      All statements which the court permits or requires to be made before it by witnesses in relation to the matters of fact under inquiry; such statements are called oral evidence. Further, oral evidence is the evidence which is confined to words spoken by mouth or gestures.
    • 2. Documentary Evidence
      Documentary evidence is the evidence that mentions any issue described or expressed upon any material by way of letters, figures or marks or by more than one of the ways which can be used for recording the issue. Such evidence is presented in the form of a document to prove a disputed fact in court.

      Further Documentary Evidence is divided into two types i.e. Primary and Secondary evidence.

      • • Primary evidence can be understood as the documentary evidence produced before the court holding supreme value. It is the first hand and the most reliable copy of evidence.
      • • In the absence of any primary evidence, secondary evidence can be used. It is produced from alternative sources in lack of original or main source.
    • 3. Hearsay Evidence
      Hearsay evidence means the statement of a witness not based on his personal knowledge but on what he heard from others. It may be called as an indirect, second-hand or derivative evidence. It is a statement made to the Court by a witness who has not seen the happening of the transaction or facts but heard that something had happened.
    • 4. Circumstantial Evidence
      Circumstantial or indirect evidence refers to evidence which proves the facts in issue by providing other facts, that is, indirect facts and then proving their relevance.

    Thus, Evidence is an imperative part of every case, whether it is a criminal case or a civil suit as it validates a fact. In simpler terms, it would be impossible to determine the results of a case without having any evidence in the case.

    01 Feb 2024
    Question :- Discuss the Doctrine of Frustration of Contract as applicable under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act? Also discuss the grounds of frustration of contract?

    Answer:- Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 deals with the doctrine of frustration. According to Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, an agreement that is impossible to perform is itself void. In addition to that, Section 56 also mentions that when a contract to perform an act becomes impossible or for some reason of some event which neither the promisor nor the promisee can prevent, it becomes unlawful and the entire contract becomes void. Section 56 is based on the maxim “les non cogit ad impossibilia” which means that the law will not compel a man to do what he cannot possibly perform.

    In order to apply Section 56, the following conditions must be fulfilled-
    • 1) There should be a valid and subsisting contract between the parties
    • 2) There must be some part of the contract yet to be performed
    • 3) The contract after it is entered becomes impossible to be performed
    • 4) The impossibility is by reason of some events which the promisor could not prevent
    • 5) The impossibility is not induced by the promisor or due to his negligence

    The following are the grounds of frustration of contract-

    • 1. Destruction of subject matter
      The Doctrine of Impossibility applies where the actual and specific subject matter of the contract is destroyed.
    • 2. Changes in circumstances
      A contract will frustrate where such circumstances arise which makes the performance of the contract impossible.
    • 3. Non-occurrence of the contemplated event
      The event which was contemplated to happen becomes impossible to occur.
    • 4. Death or incapacity of party to perform
      When the performance of the contract depends upon the existence of a person and if such a person dies or becomes incapable.
    • 5. Government intervention
      A contract will be dissolved when legislative or administrative intervention has taken place, it maybe because of formation of new law or simply passing an executive order or passing of a judicial pronouncement.
    • 6. Intervention of War
      Contracts may also become impossible of performance owing to the prevalence of war conditions and such contracts are void.

    Thus, the doctrine of frustration deals with those cases where the performance of contract has been frustrated and the performance of it has become impossible to perform due to any unforeseen reason or situation.

    31 Jan 2024
    Question :- What is extortion? How does it differs from theft under Indian Penal Code?

    Answer:- According to Section 383 of the IPC:
    “Extortion is the act of dishonestly inducing any person to transfer property, valuable security or anything that can be transformed into a valuable security to another person by deliberately causing fear of harm to themselves or others.”

    In order to constitute the offence of extortion, the following essentials must be satisfied-

    • • Extortion involves deliberately causing fear in the victim of immediate injury, death or wrongful restraint.
    • • The offender must have the intention to commit extortion which involves using threats to induce the victim to give up property or valuable security.
    • • The objective of extortion is to obtain property or valuable security from the victim as a result of the threat made.

    For example- A person threatens to file a false criminal case against another person unless he pays him a sum of money.

    Theft and extortion are two distinct offences under the Indian Penal Code as both the offences involve unlawful taking of property. The following are the differences between theft and extortion:-

    • ✔ According to Section 378 of the IPC, theft involves dishonest taking of any movable property with the intent to deprive the owner of such property. On the other hand, extortion is defined under Section 383 of the IPC as the act of intentionally putting a person in fear of injury to that person or to someone in whom that person is interested, in order to compel the person to deliver property or valuable security.
    • ✔ The essential ingredients of theft are dishonesty, taking of property and the intent to permanently deprive the owner of such property. On the other hand, the essential elements of extortion are the use of force or threat of force, the intention to compel the delivery of property or valuable security and the intention to cause harm or injury to the victim.

    Thus, it can be concluded that the main difference between theft and extortion is that theft is the act of taking someone’s property without their consent while extortion is the act of using force or threat of force to compel someone to give up their property.

    30 Jan 2024
    Question :- Difference between Acquittal and Discharge?

    Answer:- The following are the difference between acquittal and discharge:-

    • 1. Acquittal is when the accused is proven innocent by the court after examining all the facts and evidences presented in the case and is lawfully freed whereas Discharge refers to the legal order of release issued by a Magistrate when there is no prima facie evidence available against the accused.
    • 2. In case of Acquittal, a person who has been acquitted cannot be prosecuted for the same offense again whereas a person who has been discharged may be re-arrested for additional inquiry.
    • 3. Acquittal is a judicial decision in a criminal case that signifies that the person is not guilty of the offence. On the other hand, Discharge is an order in a criminal case that signifies that the legal proceedings lack sufficient evidence and grounds for it to be continued.
    • 4. A person might be acquitted only after the charges have been filed whereas a person might be discharged even before charges are filed.

    Therefore, it can be concluded that the major difference between the two is that a person cannot be arrested for the same case in which he has been acquitted by the court whereas a person who has been discharged can be re-arrested for further inquiry.

    27 Jan 2024
    Question :- Difference between Coercion and Undue Influence under Indian Contract Act?

    Answer:- The following are the difference between Coercion and Undue influence-

    • 1. Coercion is an act of threatening which involves the use of physical force whereas Undue Influence is an act of influencing the will of the other party.
    • 2. Coercion is defined under Section 15 of the Indian Contract Act whereas Undue Influence is dealt under Section 16 of the Indian Contract Act.
    • 3. In Coercion, no established relationship is required between the parties. On the other hand, Undue influence exists only when there is a relationship between the parties (e.g., fiduciary relationship).
    • 4. Coercion involves threats, physical violence or use of force whereas Undue influence involves moral force or mental pressure.
    • 5. Coercion is regarded as a criminal offence whereas Undue influence is not considered as a criminal offence.

    Therefore, it can be concluded that Coercion involves use of force or threats to obtain consent while undue influence is the improper use of power to manipulate to enter into an agreement.

    25 Jan 2024
    Question :- What is the difference between Decree and Order?

    Answer:- The following are the differences between Decree and Order:-

    • 1) According to Section 2(2) of CPC, Decree means a formal expression of an adjudication which so far as regards the Court expressing it, conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be preliminary or final whereas an Order is the formal expression of any decision of a civil court which is not a decree as defined under Section 2(14) of the CPC.
    • 2) A decree originates from a suit commenced by presenting a plaint whereas an order is passed in suits initiated through plaint or application or petition.
    • 3) A decree conclusively determines the rights of the parties involved in one or more matters while an order may or may not provide a final determination of such rights.
    • 4) A decree may be preliminary, final, or partly preliminary and partly final whereas an order is always final.
    • 5) Generally, a suit can have only one decree except in certain circumstances. However, one or more orders can be passed in a suit.
    • 6) Every decree in a suit can be appealed against but not all orders can be appealed against as there are specific orders that can be subject to appeal. For Example- Section 104 and Order 43, Rule 1 of the CPC.
    • 7) A second appeal lies to the High Court in the case of a decree if there is some substantial question of law involved therein whereas no second appeal lies at all even in the case of appealable orders.

    Thus, it can be concluded that both decree and order represent formal expression of decisions by a court but they differ in various aspects. A decree is passed in suits that have commenced before the presentation of the plaint and conclusively determines the rights of the parties involved. On the other hand, an order can originate from a suit or through petition-based proceedings but it may or may not provide a final determination of rights.

    24 Jan 2024
    Question :- Difference between Summon Case and Warrant Case?

    Answer:- The following are the difference between the Summon Case and Warrant Case-

    • • A Summon case means a case relating to an offence and not being a warrant case whereas a Warrant case means a case relating to the offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years.
    • • The procedure for summon case has been dealt under Chapter-XX of the Cr.P.C. (Sections 251-259) whereas the procedure for warrant cases has been provided under Chapter XIX of the Cr.P.C. (Sections 238-250).
    • • In Summon cases, framing of charges against the accused is not necessary only particulars of the offence must be conveyed to him whereas in warrant cases, framing of charges against the accused is mandatory.
    • • A summon case can be converted into a warrant case but a warrant case cannot be converted into a summon case.

    Thus, it can be concluded that summons case refers to an offence that does not fall under the category of a warrant case. These offences typically carry less severe penalties as compared to warrant cases whereas warrant case involves offences that are punishable with death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment exceeding two years. These offences are considered more serious and grave in nature.

    23 Jan 2024
    Question :- Explain Mitakshara and Dayabhaga Schools of law?

    Answer:- MITAKSHARA SCHOOL: Mitakshara is one of the essential schools of Hindu law. It is derived from the commentary of the Smriti written by Yajnvalkya. Except for West Bengal and Assam, Mitakshara School is applicable to the whole part of India. Even though Mitakshara has a wide jurisdiction, different part of the country practices law differently due to different customary rules followed by them.

    Mitakshara is divided into five sub-schools namely:

    • • Benaras Hindu law school
    • • Mithila law school
    • • Maharashtra law school
    • • Punjab law school
    • • Dravida or Madras law school

    These law schools comes within the scope of Mitakshara law school and enjoys the same fundamental principle but priority is given to certain treaties and commentaries which is under the authority of Mitakshara.

    DAYABHAGA SCHOOL:

    Dayabhaga School is primarily recognized in Assam and West Bengal. It is one of the essential schools of Hindu laws. It is considered to be a summary for the leading smritis. It primarily focuses on ways to deal with partition, inheritance and joint family.

    In Dayabhaga School, various other commentaries were followed such as:

    • • Dayatatya
    • • Dayakram-sangrah
    • • Virmitrodaya
    • • Dattaka Chandrika

    Thus, it can be concluded that the Schools of Hindu law are considered to be the basic source of Hindu law which constituted in the development of the Hindu law from its roots. These schools have widened the scope of Hindu law and explicitly contributed in its development.

    20 Jan 2024
    Question :- Difference between Void & Voidable Marriage under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?

    Answer:- The following are the distinction between Void and Voidable Marriages:-

    • 1. A void marriage is considered as no marriage as it is ab initio whereas voidable marriage is a valid marriage unless its validity is not challenged by either of the parties to a marriage.
    • 2. Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, deals with Void Marriage. Marriage which infringes the grounds mentioned under Section 5 (i), (iv) and (v) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are void marriages whereas Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, deals with voidable marriage. Marriage which infringes the grounds mentioned under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are voidable marriages.
    • 3. A Void Marriage does not have any significance in the eyes of law whereas Voidable Marriage is in force and remains valid unless it is questioned.
    • 4. In case of void marriages, the court orders the decree of nullity whereas in case of voidable marriages, the court orders the decree after considering all the relevant conditions.
    • 5. In void marriage, the parties have the liberty to remarry without any decree of nullity from the court whereas in Voidable Marriage parties are not entitled to do so.
    • 6. In void marriages, the first wife as well as the third party whose rights are infringed, has the liberty to file a suit in Civil Court for the declaration of such marriage as void whereas in case of voidable marriage, the parties to marriage have the authority to apply for quashing of such marriage.

    Thus, it can be concluded that the main distinction between void and voidable marriages lies in the fact that a void marriage is void from the beginning, whereas voidable marriage is first valid but may be annulled under certain legal situations.

    17 Jan 2024
    Question :- If A had mixed sugar, mistaking it as poison, with milk and then places the glass on Z’s table. Will A be held guilty for attempt to commit murder or not?

    Answer:- On the plain reading of the factual situation given it appears that A has not committed any offence but on analysing the facts properly it can be seen that an offence of attempt to murder has been committed.

    The factual situation in the question attracts the legal maxim of “Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea”, which means that an act does not makes a man guilty of a crime, unless his mind is also guilty.

    So, the facts given in the question paints a very clear picture that an offence of attempt to murder has been committed by A.

    As pointed above for an act to be punishable either for attempt to commit crime or for actual commission of crime, the existence of a guilty or criminal intention to commit crime (mens rea) is necessary along with an overt act forming part of a series of act which would constitute the actual commission of the offence if it were not interrupted.

    Thus, the problem in hand where, A mixed sugar, mistaking it as poison, with milk and then placed the glass on Z’s table, it means A had an intention to murder Z. A did everything on his part to implement his criminal intention to kill Z, therefore even if there was sugar and not poison in glass of Z, A is still guilty of attempt to commit murder of Z.

    16 Jan 2024
    Question :- What is a decree? Explain.

    Answer:- A Decree is judicial determination of rights of parties regarding the matter in controversy involved in a suit. The final determination made by the Judge need to conclusively determine the rights of the parties irrespective of the effect such decree has on a suit.

    According to Section 2 (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Decree means-

    "The formal expression of an adjudication which, so far as regards the Court expressing it, conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be either preliminary or final.

    It shall be deemed to include the rejection of a plaint and the determination of any question within Section 144, but shall not include-

    • (a) any adjudication from which an appeal lies as an appeal from an order or
    • (b) any order of dismissal for default"

    Explanation – A decree is preliminary when further proceedings have to be taken before the suit can be completely disposed of. It is final when such adjudication completely disposes of the suit, it may be partly preliminary and partly final.

    The following are the essentials of a decree-

    • 1. There must be an adjudication:
      In a suit whenever the judge pronounces a formal decision regarding the matter in dispute, such judicial determination is known as adjudication. For a decision of a court to be a decree, adjudication made by a judge in court of law is necessary. It can be said that any decision in an administrative proceeding does not amounts to adjudication because the decision is not judicially determined.
    • 2. The adjudication must be done in a suit:
      Suit has not been defined anywhere under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Suit in general sense would mean a civil proceeding instituted by presentation of plaint. It can be derived from the above mentioned statements that where no civil suit is instituted the adjudication pronounced by the officer in such cases would not amount to a decree. Certain applications instituted are to be treated as suits like proceedings under the Indian Succession Act, the Hindu Marriage Act, the Land Acquisition Act, the Arbitration Act, etc. The decision given under such proceedings are to be treated as decree.
    • 3. The adjudication must be done in determining the rights of the parties relating to all or any of the matter in dispute:
      The adjudication of a dispute must determine the rights of the parties with respect to all or any matters in dispute in the suit. Rights of the parties includes substantive and not only procedural rights. For example- Rights of the parties relating to status, limitation, jurisdiction, frame of suit, accounts etc. The rights in matters of procedure are not included in the category of rights under this section.
    • 4. Such determination must be conclusive in nature:
      The determination passed by a Court must be final and conclusive in nature. Such decision is a decree which is final and conclusive with respect to the determination of the rights of the parties irrespective of whether the suit has been disposed of by such decision or not.
      For example:
      • • Summary disposal of appeal under Order XLI.
      • • Decision dismissing a suit for want of evidence or proofs are decrees.
    • 5. There must be a formal expression of such adjudication:
      The Court must express its decision formally in accordance with the provisions of law.

    Thus, it can be concluded that decree is a judicial determination of rights of the parties with respect to any matters of controversy in suit.

    15 Jan 2024
    Question :- A intending to murder Z, mixes poison with the milk and then places the glass on Z’s table. What offence did A commit?

    Answer:- In light of the given facts there is an issue arising from the problem that-

    Whether the act done by A would amount to attempt to murder or is it mere preparation not punishable by law?
    The answer to this issue lies in the understanding of the concept of attempt. What constitutes an “attempt” is a mixed question of law and fact, depending largely on the circumstances of the particular case. An “attempt” to commit a crime can be defined as the last proximate act, which a person does towards the commission of an offence, the consummation of the offence being hindered by circumstances beyond his control.

    Thus, it is clear from the discussion that before there can be an attempt to commit the crime, there has to be an intention to commit the crime which may be making preparation for committing the offence. Attempt would be a final assault towards the commission of the crime, which may be prevented by some unforeseen events.

    Considering the factual situation presented in the question, where A intending to murder Z mixes poison, with the milk and then places the glass on Z’s table. It means A intended to murder Z and for implementing his intention he did what he could have done by mixing poison in milk glass of Z and also placing it on table.

    In this case the act of A's mixing of poison in the milk would amount to mere preparation for committing the offence of murder, which would alone not amount to an offence punishable by law. The overt act done by A where he places the poisoned milk glass on Z’s table would amount to attempt. Thus, A has committed the offence of attempt to commit murder of Z.

    11 Jan 2024
    Question :- Discuss the law of “Attempt” under Indian Penal Code?

    Answer:- An attempt is an overt act done with an intent to commit such act which would amount to a criminal offence, but it is more than merely making preparation to commit a crime. Attempt is a part of series of acts, which would constitute to actual commission of a crime, if such acts done were not interrupted. Attempt construes of mens rea + actus reus, as it is an overt act done with an intention towards the commission of a crime. Liability begins at a stage when the offender has done an act towards the commission of an offence. The point at which such a series of acts begins cannot be defined but depends upon the circumstances of each particular case.

    Attempt has not been defined under Indian Penal Code, 1860, only punishment for attempt has been given under section 511. According to Stephen:

    “An attempt to commit a crime is an act done with an intent to commit that crime, and forming part of a series of acts, which would constitute its actual commission if it were not interrupted.

    Thus, an act done with intent to commit a crime the commission of which in the manner proposed was, in fact, impossible, is an attempt to commit that crime.

    The following are the essentials of an act amounting to attempt of a crime-

    • An overt act done ( actus reus)
    • With an intention to commit a crime (mens rea)
    • Such an act done or a series of acts done
    • Which are forming part of the same transaction
    • Which would constitute to actual commission of a crime if it were not interrupted

    For Example:
    A, intending to murder Z, buys a gun and loads it. A is not yet guilty of an attempt to commit murder. A fires the gun at Z, he is guilty of an attempt to commit murder.

    In Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar, (1962), there is a distinction between ‘preparation’ and ‘attempt’. Attempt begins where preparation ends. Anyone who commits the offence of “attempt to commit a particular offence” when:

    • (i) the person intends to commit that particular offence; and
    • (ii) when the person, having made preparations with the intention to commit the offence, does an act towards its commission such an act need not be the penultimate act towards the commission of that offence but must be an act during the course of committing that offence.”

    So it can be concluded from the aforesaid that before there can be an attempt to commit the crime, there has to be an intention to commit the crime. Attempt would be a final assault towards the commission of the crime, which may be prevented by some unforeseen events.

    Therefore, it can be said that an overt act committed with an intention to commit a crime which is interrupted by happening of some unforeseen events. Such overt act would amount to the offence of attempt punishable under Indian Penal Code, 1860.

    08 Jan 2024
    Question :- What are the obligations which the law creates in the absence of the agreements? Explain with concerning sections, with the help of illustrations.

    Answer:- Section 68 to 72 of the Indian Contract Act (hereinafter referred as the Act) deals with the obligations which the law creates in the absence of the agreements. These are known as quasi contracts as these are such agreement which resembles the ordinary contracts. These are those contracts which do not contain the formalities of a contract but the obligations that these contract create is similar to the one created by the contract.

    The essence of these contracts lies in the theory of unjust enrichment. It has been based upon the principle “nemo debet locupletari ex aliana jactura” i.e. no person must enrich himself at the cost of the other.

    Types of quasi contracts under the Act-

    • 1. Claim for necessaries supplied to person incapable of contracting, or on his account- as per section 68 of the Act if any person has supplied necessities to any person who is himself incapable to enter into a contract and such things are necessary for his life then the person who has supplied is entitled to reimburse from the estate of such person.
    • 2. Reimbursement of person paying money due by another, in payment of which he is interested- if any person has paid any sum or has done any act which he was not legally bound to pay but is interested in such payment, for another person who is legally bound to pay then the person who has paid is entitled to reimburse from the other person.
    • 3. Obligation of person enjoying benefit of non-gratuitous act- when any person has done any act or made any payment for which he did not have any intention to do It gratuitously and the other person has enjoyed the benefit of it then the person who has so done the act is entitled to get the repayment to be done or to get the return of that thing.
    • 4. Responsibility of finder of goods- as per section 71 if any person is the finder of goods then he will be responsible as a bailee.
    • 5. Liability of person to whom money is paid, or thing delivered, by mistake or under coercion- when any person has made any payment or has delivered anything under mistake or coercion then the person who has received the payment or has received such delivery is liable to return or repay the same to the person who has made such payment or has delivered.
    06 Jan 2024
    Question :- What is law on Medical Negligence in India, Elaborate?

    Answer:- Negligence means carelessness amounting to the culpable breach of a duty also, failure to do something that a reasonable or prudent man (i.e. an average responsible citizen) would do or doing something that a reasonable man would not do. It can sub-categorized as Professional Negligence involving someone with a special skill and expected to show the skill of an average member of his profession.

    Under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 Medical Negligence is covered under Section 304A which states that “Whoever causes the death of any person by doing any rash or negligent act not amounting to culpable homicide, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both”.

    In general, for an offence to fall under section 304A there has to be recklessness in the act meaning the person should be indifferent to the consequences of his act the act must be rash and negligent. When such negligence is committed by any medical professional then it is considered to be a medical negligence. Broad principles under medical negligence as tort have been laid down in the celebrated case of Jacob Mathew Vs State of Punjab and Another.

    In this case it was held that in the technical profession basic freedom of action should be given as there are many line of treatments, he chooses one and if that fails then he can switch to another one So he must be given that freedom of action The court held that a medical professional shall be held liable only for Gross Negligence. As per the guidelines of the court the Gross Negligence would include the following situations-

    • (1) The doctor having the skill but refuses to exercise the skill
    • (2) The doctor did not have the skill for that treatment but still he did the treatment knowing that it was risky
    • (3) The doctor had the skill but he did the treatment in such a manner that no other doctor of ordinary prudence would have done it in such manner

    It was also held that in medical negligence the police shall not immediately arrest the doctor rather shall first take the opinion of the District Health Officer or any other qualified doctor and if he gives opinion that it was the case of gross negligence then only the arrest can be made. Similar ruling was given in the case of Dr Suresh Gupta v Government of NCT of Delhi (2004 SC).

    05 Jan 2024
    Question :- What is theft? When does it become robbery?

    Answer:- The offences against property are given under chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred as IPC). The offence of theft has been defined under section 378 and it is punishable under section 379 of IPC.
    As per section 378 IPC when any person moves the movable property of the other out of the other person’s possession and without that person’s consent then he is said to have committed the offence of theft. Also for the offence of theft it is essential that the person must have moved the property with a dishonest intention. Therefore for an offence of theft following are the essential requirements-

    • 1. Dishonestly- it has been stated that the moving of the property must be done with a dishonest intention. The term dishonestly has been defined under section 24 IPC. As per section 24 dishonestly means that the person must have an intention to cause wrongful loss to another person or to cause wrongful gain to himself.
    • 2. Moving the movable property- for an offence of theft the physical movement of the property is required. The person must move the property so as to take the property out of the possession of the other person. The property moved must be a movable property.
    • 3. Out of the possession- for an offence of theft it is required that the offender has taken the property out of the possession of the other person. The term possession here includes physical as well as constructive possession. A property is said to be out of the possession of the person when he loses the control over the property.
    • 4. Without the consent- in the offence of theft the moving of the property is done without the consent of the person from whose possession the property is taken out.

    Section 390 IPC defines the term robbery. It tells us as to how does a theft is converted into the offence of robbery. As per section 390 theft is converted into robbery when the person in order to the committing of the theft, or in committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death or of instant hur, or of instant wrongful restraint, then such person is said to have committed the offence of robbery.

    04 Jan 2024
    Question :- What are the provisions relating to the relevancy of character of the accused in a criminal case and civil case?

    Answer:- As per the general rule of vicarious liability the agent is never held liable and it is the principal who is always held liable for the acts of the agent within the scope or the extent of authority. The same principle has been given under section 230 of the Indian Contract Act (hereinafter referred as the act). As per section 230 it has been stated that the agent can neither sue nor he be sued personally for the enforcement of the contract. But there are three exceptions to this rule in which the presumption is raised that in such cases the agent undertakes to be personally liable. These are as follows-

    • 1. When the principal is a merchant who has appointed an agent for the buying and selling of the goods and such merchant principal is residing in a foreign country then in such situation the agent will be held personally liable.
    • 2. When the agent does not disclose the name of the principal on whose behalf he was acting then in such case the agent will be personally liable and not the principal. 3. When even though the agent has disclosed the name of the principal but still the principal cannot be sued then the agent will be personally liable and not the principal. If the principal is incompetent to contract then the principal cannot be sued.

    Pretended Agent- as per section 235 of the act if the agent untruly represents to some party that he is acting as an agent to the principal and on such representation he induces that party to deal with him then he will be personally liable to compensate the loss of the party.

    Fraud or misrepresentation by the agent- as per section 238 of the act if the agent has committed fraud or misrepresentation in the course of business then the principal will be held liable. But if the agent commits fraud or misrepresentation outside the scope of authority then the agent will be held personally liable and the principal is not bound by it.

    03 Jan 2024
    Question :- What are the provisions relating to the relevancy of character of the accused in a criminal case and civil case?

    Answer:- The relevancy of character evidence is given under section 52 to 55 of the Indian Evidence Act (hereinafter referred to as IEA). The character of a person means the behavioural pattern of any person i.e. how the person conducts towards the society at large. Section 55 defines the term character as the general reputation and disposition of a person. Such evidence may or may not be relevant in the civil or criminal cases. In civil cases as per section 52 the character of a person is generally irrelevant.

    But there are certain circumstances in which the character of a person in civil cases becomes relevant. These are as follows-

    • 1. The character of a person in civil cases becomes relevant when such character appears from facts otherwise relevant. This means that the character in civil cases will be relevant if such character is relevant in some other provision of the IEA.
    • 2. Also as per section 55 of the IEA in civil cases the character of only the plaintiff shall be relevant. Also such character of the plaintiff shall be relevant only if such character affects the quantum of damages he ought to receive.

    In criminal cases such character evidence shall be relevant according to the nature of character. In criminal cases the previous good character of the accused is relevant as per section 53 of the IEA. But in section 54 it has been stated that previous bad character of the accused is not relevant. In section 54 it has also been stated that previous bad character in criminal cases becomes relevant in the following circumstances-

    • 1. The bad character becomes relevant when the accused has given evidence of his good character. Therefore the bad character of the accused is relevant only in reply to the evidence of good character by the accused.
    • 2. Also the bad character of the accused becomes relevant when it is the fact in issue in itself. This happens in cases of previous conviction as in case of previous conviction the bad character is the fact in issue to be proved.
    02 Jan 2024
    Question :- Explain how foreign judgments are enforced in India?

    Answer:- Section 13 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 provides for 6 hurdles/conditions which are pre-requisite for enforcing a foreign judgment in India.
    The Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1937 inserted Section-44A which made bifurcation between “Reciprocating” and “non-reciprocating” territories.
    Foreign judgments cannot be directly put to execution and enforcement. It is for this purpose that the CPC lays down the test for a foreign judgment to be ‘conclusive’ for being rendered as enforceable, vide Section 13(2). The six hurdles that such a judgment must cross over are:

    • 1. Court of competent jurisdiction;
      • Whether a foreign court is of competent jurisdiction within this section has to be determined according to principles of International Law and not merely according to the law of the foreign country in which the court delivering the judgment functions.
      • In Pemberton v. Hughes (UK case) lordship Lindley. M.R. observed “the jurisdiction which alone is important in these matters is the competence of the Court in international sense i.e. its territorial competence over the subject-matter and over the defendant. Its competence of jurisdiction in any other sense is not regarded as material by the Courts of this country”
      • The question whether a foreign Court is a proper court to deal with a particular matter according to law of the foreign country is a question for the Court of that country and when a foreign court of final authority decides that a particular court is a proper court its decision must be regarded as conclusive for purpose of sec 13.
    • 2. Merits of the case;
      • Courts in India have power to examine the judgment to see whether it has been given on merit. It is not open to the court trying the suit in a foreign judgment to decide whether decision of foreign court on the material put before it is right or wrong. The duty of court is merely to see that the foreign court has applied its mind to the fact of the case and law on the point.
      • True test for deciding is to see whether it has been given as penalty for any conduct of the defendant or whether it is based on a consideration of the truth or otherwise of the plaintiff’s case.
    • 3. Incorrect view of international law or a refusal to recognise the law of India;
      • In Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. V. General Electric Co. (1994) it was held that in the field of Private International Law, court refuses to apply a rule of foreign law or recognize foreign judgment or foreign arbitral award if it is found that the same is contrary to the public policy of the country in which it is sought to be enforced
      • Incorrectness or refusal must appear on the face of the proceedings.
    • 4. Natural justice; As observed by the Supreme Court in Viswanathan v. Abdul Wajid, the minimum requirement of natural justice are:
      • a) Judge must be composed of impartial person acting fairly, without bias and in good faith.
      • b) Parties must be afforded opportunity to present their case.
    • 5. Fraud;
      • Fraud must not be merely constructive, it must be actual fraud consisting of representations designed and intended to mislead.
      • Fraud either on the part of the party in whose favour judgment is given or on the part of the Court pronouncing judgment.
      • Fraud should be connected with the procedure followed in the suit.
    • 6. Breach of any law in force in India;
      • Foreign judgment founded on breach of any law in force in India, it will not be enforced even though the defect is not apparent on the face of the proceedings.

    The Supreme Court of India in Y. Narasimha Rao v. Y. Venkata Lakshmi ruled that:
    (a) Court of competent jurisdiction would be the one which the law under which parties are married, recognises. Any other court would be court without jurisdiction, unless both parties voluntarily and unconditionally subject themselves to the jurisdiction of that Court.

    (b) It was held that the decision must be given on the “merits” of the case i.e.:

    • (i) The ground of divorce in the decision of the foreign court should be a ground available under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. For instance, if the ground of the foreign decree was cruelty on the applicant, this would be acceptable, as “cruelty” is a stated ground under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. But the same cannot be said for “irretrievable breakdown of marriage”, as this is not a ground under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
    • (ii) The decision should be a result of contest between the parties. The non-applicant should have unconditionally submitted to the jurisdiction of the foreign court and contested the claim or agreed to the passing of the decree. The concept of acquiescence to jurisdiction would not suffice.

    (c) Refusal to recognise the law of India, is covered by saying that the ground for divorce in the foreign decree is a ground available under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

    (d) The foreign judgment was obtained as opposed to natural justice. The concept of natural justice is the provision of fair hearing; absence of bias of Judge and following the elementary principles of fair play. This is a larger concept but shortly can be stated as essential trappings in order to have a fair adjudication. Where for instance respondent was denied documents filed by the other side or where the respondent was denied the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses of the other side, without a justifiable cause, these would be opposed to the principles of natural justice.

    (e) Where the foreign decree was obtained by fraud. Fraud at any stage vitiates legal proceedings. It is often said that law and fraud cannot co-exist.

    In Satya v. Teja Singh, when the respondent had instituted a foreign court proceeding, in a court in whose jurisdiction the applicant has never lived, respondent had made a false representation that respondent was a bona fide resident of that State. It was held that the respondent had practised fraud on the foreign court by concealing this fact. Therefore, that foreign court had no territorial jurisdiction. That foreign court decree was declared invalid by the Supreme Court of India.

    In the case of Gurdas Mann v. Mohinder Singh Brar, the Punjab & Harayana High Court held that an ex-parte judgment and decree which did not show that the plaintiff had led evidence to prove his claim before the Court, was not executable under Section 13(b) of the CPC since it was not passed on the merits of the claim.

    30 Dec 2023
    Question :- Discuss the Doctrine of Election.

    Answer:- Doctrine of Election is based on principles of equity. Under any instrument if two rights are conferred on a person in such a manner that one right is in lieu of the other, he is bound to elect only one of them. A person cannot choose to select the part of instrument or transaction that is beneficial to him and choose to reject the other part.

    The doctrine of election is a branch of rule of estoppel, in terms whereof a person may be precluded by his actions or conduct or silence when it is his duty to speak, from asserting a right which he otherwise would have had. The doctrine of election postulates that when two remedies are available for the same relief, the aggrieved party has the option to elect either of them but not both.

    Section 35 of Transfer of Property Act deals with the doctrine of election. It states that a person transfers a property to another person and that is such property for which he has no right to transfer. Also in such transfer he has conferred a benefit upon the owner of the property, and then in such situation the owner has two options with him. The first one being that the owner can confirm the transfer and accept the benefit and the second one being that the owner can dissent from the transfer. But when he dissents or discards the transfer then he has to return the benefit back to the transferee. Where a particular benefit is expressed to be conferred on the owner of the property which the transferor possesses to transfer, and such benefit is in lieu of that property, if such owner claims the property, he is not bound to relinquish any other benefit that he achieves through the same transaction.

    The acceptance of the benefit by the original owner will be considered to be an election by him to confirm the transfer, if he is aware of his duties and responsibilities and of the circumstances that might influence a prudent (reasonable) man into making an election. This knowledge of the circumstances can be assumed if the person who gets the benefit enjoys it for a period of more than two years without doing any act to express dissent. The transferor would ask him to elect his choice, if the original owner does not elect his option within a year of the transfer of property. Even after the reasonable time, if he still does not elect, the original owner shall be presumed to have elected the validation of the property transfer as his choice.

    29 Dec 2023
    Question :- Analyse the constitutional powers of the Supreme Court of India.

    Answer:- There are various powers or jurisdictions of Supreme Court under the Constitution of India. These are as follows-

    • 1. Powers related to Original jurisdiction- under Article 131 of the Constitution of India the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court has been provided. Original jurisdiction means that the SC has the power to deal with the cases originally. These disputes are the ones between the Centre and the States, the centre and the states on one side and the states on the other side, between any two states.
    • 2. Power of Writ jurisdiction- the Supreme Court has the power to issue writs as per article 32 for the infringement of fundamental rights. The writs are in the nature of habeas corpus, quo warranto, mandamus, certiorari and prohibition. This is also a kind of original jurisdiction.
    • 3. Power of advisory jurisdiction- As per article 143 of the Constitution only the Supreme Court is empowered to provide the advice to the President in case the latter refers any question to the Supreme Court for its opinion.
    • 4. Power to hear appeals- The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be invoked by a certificate granted by the High Court concerned under Article 132(1), 133(1) or 134 of the Constitution in respect of any judgement, decree or final order of a High Court in both civil and criminal cases, involving substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. Appeals also lie to the Supreme Court in civil matters if the High Court concerned certifies: (a) that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance, and (b) that, in the opinion of the High Court, the said question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court. In criminal cases, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court if the High Court – (a) has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death (b) has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any court subordinate to its authority and has in such trial convicted the accused person and sentenced him to death (c) certifies under Article 134A that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court.
    • 5. Power of special leave to appeal- The Supreme Court has also a very wide appellate jurisdiction over all Courts and Tribunals in India in as much as it may, in its discretion, grant special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any Court or Tribunal in the territory of India.

    28 Dec 2023
    Question :- 'A' makes an offer to 'B' by letter. Immediately on receiving the letter 'B' writes letter rejecting the offer. However 'B' changed his mind subsequently and before 'A' could receive the letter of rejection, B telephoned his acceptance. Is acceptance complete to create a valid contract?

    Answer:- A proposal once accepted becomes a promise. Until and unless a proposal is accepted it will not become a promise. Also the acceptance must be a valid one i.e. as per the rules and provisions of the Indian Contract Act.

    One of the important rules of a valid acceptance is that the acceptance must be duly communicated. Communication of acceptance can be done in two different modes i.e. inter presents or instantaneous rule or inter absentes or postal rule. As per the instantaneous rule the formation of contract is done as soon as the acceptance is heard by the proposer. As soon as the acceptance is heard then there is no scope of revocation and it results into a valid contract.

    In the case of Entores v. Miles Far East (1955) and Bhagwandas v. Girdharilal (1966) it was held that in the cases when the acceptance is heard then there is a concluded contract between the parties.

    In the present problem B has sent the letter of rejection to A. But before the letter reaches to A, B changed his mind and telephoned him the acceptance. As soon as the acceptance is spoken and is heard by A then we can consider that there is a valid contract between A and B.

    Therefore as B has communicated the acceptance and it has been heard by A and hence there is a valid contract.

    27 Dec 2023
    Question :- 'A' genuinely suspecting 'B' of having committed theft in his house, informs the police about his suspicion. It is later found that 'B' had nothing to do with the theft in the house of 'A'. What offence, if any, is committed by 'A'?

    Answer:- Section 76 and 79 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) deal with mistake of fact as a defence to an offence. The Latin maxim ignorantia facti excusat is the basis for this concept.

    As per section 79 IPC when any person has committed an offence and while committing the offence he was under a mistake of fact then he shall not be liable for such an offence. Under such mistake of fact and not under mistake of law he believed that he was justified by law to do that act which amounted to an offence. Also the person must have acted in good faith i.e. he did not have any criminal intention to commit this offence.

    For example- A sees Z commit what appears to A to be a murder. A, in the exercise, to the best of his judgment exerted in good faith, of the power which the law gives to all persons of apprehending murderers in the fact, seizes Z, in order to bring Z before the proper authorities. A has committed no offence, though it may turn out that Z was acting in self-defence.

    Therefore following are the conditions to be fulfilled in section 79 IPC-

    • 1. The act was done under mistake of fact and not under mistake of law.
    • 2. The act was done under mistake of fact in which the person committing the act believed himself to be justified by law to do that act.
    • 3. The act was done under good faith and without any guilty intention.
    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that when 'A' genuinely suspecting 'B' of having committed theft in his house, informs the police about his suspicion, amounts to an act done under mistake of fact in which A believed himself to be justified by law to do this act. Therefore A shall not be liable for any offence as his act will be covered under the general exception of section 79 IPC.

    26 Dec 2023
    Question :- What is a Guarantee under the Indian contract Act? What is a continuing guarantee? Can such guarantee be revoked?

    Answer:- Guarantee in general means giving assurance for the transaction or a contract. In the Indian contract Act the provisions for contract of guarantee are given under section 126 to section 147.
    As per section 126 a contract of guarantee means a contract in which one person known as the surety promises to pay or to compensate the promisee or the creditor in case the principal debtor makes a default in payment. Therefore a recoverable debt is a prerequisite for the contract of guarantee. In the contract of guarantee the liability of the surety is secondary to the principal debtor. Firstly the principal debtor is liable to pay or to repay the debt of the creditor. It is only after the principal debtor makes a default, the liability of surety arises. Therefore it is said that the contract of guarantee is accessory to the main contract between the principal debtor and the creditor.
    In a contract of guarantee there are total three agreements i.e. one between the principal debtor and a creditor, second between the creditor and the surety and last between the surety and the principal debtor.
    In a contract of guarantee the liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor. The surety may limit his liability if it has been mentioned in the contract. The maximum extent up to which the surety can be made liable is the entire amount of debt and not more than that.
    As per section 129 of the act the term continuing guarantee means the guarantee by the surety which is not given for any particular transaction rather for the series of transactions.
    Generally no guarantee can be revoked after it has been executed. But in continuing guarantee as per section 130 of the act it can be revoked as to the transactions which are not yet executed i.e. the future transaction and not for the past transactions or the transactions already executed.

    25 Dec 2023
    Question :- Can a confession of a co-accused affecting him and the other accused be proved? Explain.

    Answer:- Co-accused is a person who has committed the crime together with the accused person and has been tried along with the accused. The confession of a co-accused affecting his own interest and the interest of the other accused can be proved and used against the other accused. Such provision has been given under section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act. As per section 30 if the following conditions are fulfilled then the confession of the co- accused can be used against the other accused-

    • 1. The first and foremost condition to be fulfilled is that the confession must be of such a person who is a co-accused. A co-accused is a person who is accused of the same offence as that of the main accused. Also the co-accused must be jointly tried with the other accused. Jointly tried here means that the trial of both the accused must be joined as per the rules given under section 223 CrPC. Therefore if the charges were framed only against one accused and the other accused was discharged then they will not be considered to be jointly tried.
    • 2. Second condition to be fulfilled here is that the confession of the co- accused must be proved. The term “proved” here means that the confession was duly proved by the material oral or documentary evidences and the other party had the opportunity to cross examine the co-accused on the basis of such confession. Therefore if one accused was charged but the other co-accused was declared as an approver then the confession will not be considered as being proved and such a confession cannot be used against the other accused.
    The above mentioned conditions were clarified in the case of Kashmira Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1952 SC)

    23 Dec 2023
    Question :- State the procedure to be followed by a Magistrate when there is a complaint case and police investigation is going on in respect of the same offence.

    Answer:-
    The procedure to be followed by a Magistrate when there is a complaint case and police investigation is going on in respect of the same offence has been given under section 210 CrPC.

    The object behind section 210 is to prevent the wastage of time of the court. The basic objective behind section 210 is to club the proceeding against the same accused in case of same offence. This prevents the multiplicity of proceedings.

    As per section 210 it has been stated that when the Magistrate is dealing with the complaint proceedings regarding the accused for an offence and during such inquiry or trial it appears to him that a police investigation regarding the same offence is in process, then he may stay the continuance of the complaint proceedings and may call for the police report for the offence. When the police report is filed and it appears to the Magistrate that the accused in the police report is same as that in the complaint proceedings the he may club both the proceedings and may continue to deal with the case as per the procedure in police report cases.

    But if the accused in the police report cases and the complaint proceeding is different, then the complaint proceeding will revive and both the proceedings will be carried on simultaneously.

    The real effect of section 210 is when the accused in both the complaint proceedings as well as the police report are the same. The effect was held in the case of Harjinder Singh vs. State Of Punjab And Ors. 1984 SC. It was held that when the accused is same in both the proceedings then the material evidences will be recorded only once. The trial will be joined and there will be a single judgement for both the proceedings.

    22 Dec 2023
    Question :- Describe judge's power to put questions or order production of any document or thing under section 165 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872?

    Answer:-
    The criminal justice system aims to deliver the justice. For delivery of justice and for a just and fair decision it is required that the court must be given some inherent powers to prevent the injustice. In India we follow the adversarial rule and not inquisitorial rule. But in exceptional circumstances we follow inquisitorial rule in which the court or the judge becomes pro-active and derives the truth of the matter.

    Section 165 Indian Evidence act provides one such power to the judge. This is an extra ordinary power of the judge in which the judge is empowered to ask any question at any stage of the proceeding and to any person i.e. the party or the witness. Also the judge has the power to call any witness or any person to produce any document or evidence in the case. None of the party to the case has the right to object to any question asked by the court or to any document called by the court. Also none of the party is allowed to cross examine any witness on the basis of the question asked by the judge using the power of section 165. Such cross examination can only be done by the permission of the court.

    In the case of Nepal Chandra Roy v. Netai Chandra Das (1971) the word “any” was given a wider approach to include anything which the court or the judge considers necessary in order to derive the truth.
    Exceptions to the power of the judge under section 165 IEA- The following are the exceptions to the general rule or power under section 165-

    1. The court cannot call for the secondary evidence of any primary document which has not been provided under the circumstances in section 65.

    2. The court cannot permit or compel the disclosure of the facts which are privileged or are protected under section 121 to 131 as protected communications.

    3. The court cannot ask any questions which are prohibited under section 148 or 149 being unreasonable or improper.

    21 Dec 2023
    Question :- B is A's daughter and has just come of age. A sells to B a horse which A knows to be of unsound mind. A says nothing to B about horse's unsoundness. Does A's silence amount to fraud?

    Answer:-
    As per section 17 of the Indian Contract Act fraud means an act by a party to the contract in which with the intention to deceive or to defraud he actively conceals a fact which he should have disclosed. But this only includes an active concealment of a fact fundamental to the contract.

    Generally silence does not amount to fraud. The reason behind this is that law does not cast a duty upon any person to speak. If a person was silent as to a particular fact then that does not signify that this is fraud.

    Also the explanation of section 17 states that there are only two situations in which the silence can also amount to fraud. These circumstances are as follows-

    • 1. When the person who was silent had the duty to speak.
    • 2. When his silent is equivalent to speech of the person.
    Duty to speak here means that the relation subsisting between the parties was such that one party was under the duty to speak or to disclose information to the other person. The important situation in which there is a duty to speak is in fiduciary relationships i.e. the relationship based upon mutual trust and confidence.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that in the given problem B is A’s daughter who has just become a major and hence A has the duty to disclose the fact to her that horse is of unsound mind. As A has not disclosed such fact to B so it amounts to fraud under section 17 of the Indian Contract Act.

    20 Dec 2023
    Question :- Regulating the nature of interaction between the accused and the police authorities is at the crux of a developed criminal justice system. Elaborate on the statement by referring to the guidelines laid down in the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P.

    Answer:-
    The process of arrest is very important for the criminal justice system. It is the process which initiates the process of investigation. The procedure of arrest enables the police officer to commence the investigation by interrogating the accused or the arrested person. It includes curtailment of the personal liberty of the arrested person. But at the same time we have the cardinal rule of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is considered to be an innocent until his guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore the interest of justice has to be kept in mind. Due to this the procedure of arrest has to be a regulated one.
    In the case of Meneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) it was held that the personal liberty of an individual can only be taken away as per the procedure established by law under article 21. But it was also held that such procedure has to be a just, fair and reasonable one.
    Applying the same concept the procedure of arrest must be regulated because it is an important element of criminal justice system. Therefore from section 41 to section 60A of Crpc various rules regulating the procedure of arrest has been given and also various right of the arrested persons are given.
    In the case of Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P. (1994) certain guidelines were held by the Apex Court regarding the procedure of arrest. These are as follows-

    1. Arrest of a person should not be merely on suspicion about the person’s complicity in the crime and the Police Officer must be satisfied about the justification of such arrest on the basis of some investigation.

    2. Arrest should normally be avoided except in cases of heinous crimes. Reasons for arrest must be recorded by police officer in his case diary.

    3. An arrested person being held in custody is entitled, if he so requests to have one friend, relative or other person who is known to him or likely to take an interest in his welfare told as far as practicable that he has been arrested and where he is being detained.

    4. Police officer should inform the arrested person when he is brought to the police station of this right.

    5. An entry shall be required to be made in the diary as to who was informed of the arrest. These protections from power must be held to flow from Articles 21 and 22(1) of the constitution and must be enforced strictly.

    19 Dec 2023
    Question :- ‘A’ a singer, contracts with B, the manager of the theatre, to sing at his theatre for two nights in every week during the rest two months, and B engages to pay for a hundred rupees for each night’s performance. On the sixth night, A wilfully absents herself from the theatre, and B in consequence rescinds the contract. A sues B for the breach. Discuss the liability of B.

    Answer:-
    A contract is an agreement which is enforceable by law. So when any defendant refuses to perform the contract then it is said that the contract has been breached. Breach of contract is when the defendant does not perform the contract in its entirety. The remedy which is provided under the breach of contract is compensation or damages under section 73 of the Indian Contract Act. The breach committed by the defendant can be of two types-

    • Actual breach- when at the time stipulated for the performance of the contract the defendant disables himself or refuses to perform then he shall be liable to compensate for such breach. This has been provided under section 73 of the Act.
    • Anticipatory breach- this is the kind of breach in which the defendant does not actually breach the contract at the time of performance of the contract. As per section 39 if the defendant refuses the performance of the contract or disables himself from performing the contract it is known as anticipatory breach of contract.
    • In this the plaintiff has two options in such cases- he can treat the prior non- performance as a breach and can rescind the contract before the time stipulated for actual performance. Also he has an option to wait till the stipulated time for performance and afterwards treat it as a breach of contract.
      In the case of Hochester v. De la tour (1853) it was held that the plaintiff can rescind the contract on the basis of anticipatory breach or he can wait till the actual time stipulated for performance of the contract.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that in the present case as B has breached the contract by not performing on the sixth night in the theatre therefore this can be treated as an anticipatory contract as per section 39 of the Act. Therefore B is at liberty to rescind the contract and hence he shall not be liable for damages or compensation. But at the same time he has to pay the charges for the previous five night to A for which he has performed the contract validly.

    18 Dec 2023
    Question :- A has an enlarged spleen. B knows this and gives him a kick on the abdomen which ruptures the spleen. A week later, A dies in consequence of the injury received. Discuss the guilt of B.

    Answer:-
    As per section 300 (secondly) of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as IPC) it has been mentioned that when any person causes bodily injury with the intention to cause bodily injury and at the same time such bodily injury is likely to cause death which the accused knows that it is likely to cause death.

    Section 300 (secondly) is the specie of the genus given under section 299 (part 2). As per section 300(secondly) culpable homicide will be murder when the following essentials are fulfilled-

    • 1. When the accused has caused bodily injury to the victim- the bodily injury must be caused to a particular body part of a person i.e. it has to be a specific bodily injury.
    • 2. He had the intention to cause such bodily injury- the accused did not intend to cause the death directly rather he only intended to cause bodily injury to the victim. This can be inferred by examining the nature of injury given and the kind of weapon used by the accused against the victim. Also a test of reasonable person can be conducted that whether in the same circumstances a reasonable person can be said to have the intention to cause bodily injury or not.
    • 3. Bodily injury is likely to cause death- this is the genus effect as this is also there in section 299 part II also. The bodily injury must be likely to cause death of the person. This can be proved by the report or the analysis of the doctor.
    • 4. The accused knows that the bodily injury is likely to cause death- this is the specie effect in section 300(secondly). It refers to the mental knowledge of the accused that at the time of causing such bodily injury he knew that by such injury it is likely to cause his death.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that the fact that B has an enlarged spleen and with that knowledge he kicked him and caused bodily injury. Therefore it is very clear that he had an intention to caused bodily injury as his conduct of kicking B in his abdomen shows the same. Also in B’s case such bodily injury is likely to cause death as he has an enlarged spleen. It has been stated that A knew that B is suffering from enlarged spleen. Therefore the required actus reus and mens rea for the offence under sec 300(secondly) IPC.

    Therefore A is liable for the offence of murder which is punishable under section 302 IPC.

    16 Dec 2023
    Question :- What is a declaratory decree? When the Court may refuse to grant declaratory decree?

    Answer:-
    A declaratory decree is the relief that is given to any person to declare the right, title or character of that person. The rationale behind declaratory decree is to ensure certainty of the right, title or interest of any person. It protects the disputes related to property.

    Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 allows a person to file a lawsuit against someone who denies or is interested in denying their legal character or property rights. The court can then declare that the person is entitled to the legal character or property. Section 34 is broad enough to settle disputes about legal status and conflicting property claims. However, it is not a solution for all legal disputes.

    Essential features of a declaratory decree-
    1. The plaintiff was at the time of the suit entitled to any legal character or any right to any property.
    2. The defendant had denied or was interested in denying the character or the title of the plaintiff.
    3. The declaration asked for was a declaration that the plaintiff was entitled to a legal character or to a right to property.
    4. The plaintiff was not in a position to claim a further relief than a bare declaration of his title.

    The Court may refuse to grant the relief of declaration if was able to seek any other further relief but he omits to do so. The court may refuse to grant declaratory decree in cases where the plaintiff was supposed to seek further relief but he claimed mere for the declaration of the right or title through a declaratory decree under section 34 SRA.

    15 Dec 2023
    Question :- Under what provisions of the Evidence Act are the following facts relevant?
    (a) The fact that A was absconding soon after the alleged crime.
    (b) The fact that B was seen coming out of the house of A distressed and sobbing soon after her alleged rape by A.
    (c) The question whether A robbed B, the facts that shortly before the robbery, B went to a fair with money in his possession and that he stored it or mentioned the fact that he had it to third parsons.

    Answer:-
    (a) As per section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act (hereinafter referred to as IEA) when the conduct is of a person who is the party to the suit or proceeding and such conduct is in reference to the fact in issue or relevant fact then such conduct is relevant. Such conduct must either influence or be influenced by the fact in issue or relevant fact.
    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that A here is the accused and hence he is the party to the proceeding. His conduct of absconding soon after the alleged crime is in reference to suit or proceeding or investigation of the offence. His conduct is influenced by the fact in issue i.e. the offence that he has committed.
    Therefore this fact will be a relevant fact under section 8 of the IEA.

    (b) As per section 8 the conduct of a person against whom the offence has been committed shall be relevant if such conduct is influenced by or influences the fact in issue or relevant fact in the suit or proceeding. Applying the above law to the present facts that B was seen coming out of the house of A distressed and sobbing soon after her alleged rape by A is the conduct of the victim of the crime against whom the alleged rape has been committed. Also such conduct also is influenced by the fact in issue i.e. the alleged rape.
    Therefore such fact is a relevant fact as per section 8 of the IEA.

    (c ) As per section 7 of the IEA any fact which shows the cause of the fact in issue or relevant fact shall be relevant. Cause here means the reason of the fact in issue i.e. the reason because of which the fact in issue or the relevant fact has occurred.
    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that when the question is whether A robbed B, the facts that shortly before the robbery, B went to a fair with money in his possession and that he stored it or mentioned the fact that he had it to third parsons is a relevant fact under section 7 of the IEA. This is because the fact that B went to a fair and showed his money to people is the reason or the cause that after such act he was robbed.
    Therefore such fact is relevant under section 7 of IEA.

    14 Dec 2023
    Question :- Explain the Territorial and Extra-Territorial application of IPC?

    Answer:-
    Indian Criminal Law consists of Indian Penal Code, 1860, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and Evidence Act, 1872. Collectively they provide for following types of jurisdictions:

    •  Subject-matter Jurisdiction – This put limit on Courts to exercise their powers over a particular type of case or a particular subject matter.
    • Territorial Jurisdiction – This put limit on Courts to exercise their powers within a territorial limit.
    • Pecuniary Jurisdiction – This put limitation of Courts regarding the monetary value or cost of suits or cases.
    • Original Jurisdiction – This type allows Courts to hear new cases that have been initiated.
    • Appellate Jurisdiction – This type allows Courts to re-hear or review judgments given by lower courts.
    The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 deals with the jurisdiction imposing limit on the power of the Court in exercise of their judicial function. However, Indian Penal Code provides for the limit of applicability of the Indian Law. Section 1 to 4 of the Indian Penal Code deals with the Intra- Territorial and Extra-Territorial jurisdiction. Intra-Territorial jurisdiction means where crimes and offences committed by anyone within the territory of India. Therefore, whoever commits a crime within the territory of India as mentioned under Article 1 of the Indian Constitution will be liable for punishment under the IPC.

    Section 1: It states that the IPC is applicable to whole of India including JK [vide the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019 (no. 34 of 2019) the word “except the State of Jammu and Kashmir” has been omitted.].

    Here, IPC does not specifically provide whether it is applies to Indian or the Foreign nationals.

    Section 2: states that “Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code and not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within India.” Every wrongdoer is made liable for punishment without any discrimination on the basis of his nationality, rank, caste or creed. Essential ingredients of this section:

    • An offence must be committed by any person: It means that it is not necessary for the person to be a citizen of India. As long as a person is within the territories of the Indian subcontinent, they shall be liable under this Code.
    • The person will be liable only under this Code and not otherwise: It means that intra- territorial jurisdiction under this Code only applies to offences committed under the IPC and does not hold persons liable for offences committed under other Indian laws.
    • The person should have committed some act or omission as per the provisions of this Code: It is in connection with the previous essential that only for acts or omissions committed under the IPC, the person shall be liable.
    • The person will be guilty of the offences committed within India: Only accountable in India for their actions or omissions that were committed in India as per the IPC.
    Extra-territorial jurisdiction refers to any offence committed by a citizen of India or by foreigner whether within India or outside India shall be liable for punishment in India as per the IPC.

    Section 3: provides that any person who commits any offence which is punishable under IPC outside India, it shall be considered as if he/she has committed that offence in India, even though in the country in which he committed the act is not an offence under the ordinary laws of that country and shall be dealt according to the IPC in that country.

    Section 4: Section 4 of the Indian Penal Code expands the ambit of application of Section 3 of the Act. It provides that IPC shall be applicable to:

    • Offence committed by Indian citizen outside India,
    • Offence committed by any person on any ship or aircraft registered in India no matter where it may be, and
    • Any person outside India targeting computer resource in India
    According to Section 4 of IPC, when an offence has committed outside the territory of India but is found within the territory of India. Then following options are available:

    • Extradition: He can be sent to the country where the effect of his wrongdoing took place,
    • Extraterritorial jurisdiction: He may be tried in accordance with the criminal laws of India.
    According to Section 188 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. When a wrong is committed outside the territory of India:

    • By any citizen of India, either on the high sea or elsewhere, or
    • By any non-citizen on ship or aircraft which is registered in India. He may be made liable in accordance with the provisions of Indian laws as if the offence has been committed within the territory of India.
    Thus, Section 3, Section 4 and Section 188 together form a class of law dealing with the trial of a person who has committed any act or omission outside the territory of India but that act or omission has resulted into a wrong in accordance with the provisions of the laws in force in India. Section 188 mandates the prior approval of the Government of India for the trial of every wrong committed outside the territory of India

    13 Dec 2023
    Question :- A enters into a written contract with B to work in certain mines, the property of B, upon certain terms. A was induced to do so by a misrepresentation of B, as to their value. Examine whether A can give oral evidence in this case.

    Answer:-
    As per section 59 of the Indian Evidence Act it has been stated that when any person wants to prove the contents of the contract then for that only documentary evidence can be given and oral evidence to prove the contents of the document cannot be used.

    This is known as the rule of exclusion of oral evidence by documentary evidence. The manifestation of this rule has been given under section 91 of the Act. Also section 92 of the act also states that when the terms of the contract, grants or other disposition has been reduced into writing or is required to be reduced into writing then for the addition, deletion, alteration or modification of the terms of the document only documentary evidence can be given and no oral evidence shall be allowed for that.

    But at the same time there are six provisos or exceptions to the general rule of section 92. Proviso 1 of section 92 states that when any person wants to invalidate the document on the ground of fraud, intimidation, illegality, want of due execution, want of capacity in any contracting party, want or failure of consideration, or mistake in fact or law then oral evidence can be given for that purpose.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that when A wants to give oral evidence of the fact that his consent to the contract or document was not free as it was induced by misrepresentation then he will be allowed to give oral evidence of it as it has been provided in proviso 1 of section 92 of the Act.

    12 Dec 2023
    Question :- 'A' is a tradesman in Calcutta. 'B' carries on business in Delhi. 'B', buys goods of 'A' through his agent in Calcutta and requests ‘A’ to deliver them to the Indian Railways. ‘A’ delivers the goods accordingly in Calcutta. Where can 'A' sue 'B' for the price of the goods delivered by him to 'B'?

    Answer:-
    As per section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as CPC) it has been stated that when the plaintiff wants to file a suit against the defendant then he can file the suit at a place where the cause of action lies. Also the plaintiff can file the suit at any place where the defendant voluntarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain.

    Section 20 CPC is about the territorial jurisdiction i.e. in the territory of which court the suit must be filed. It is based upon the principle that he who seeks equity must do equity i.e. if the plaintiff has approached the court then he is duty bound to file the suit for the convenience of the defendant. Therefore the suit must be filed at a place in which the defendant voluntarily resides or carries on business or personally works for gain.

    In the case of Harshad Chimanlal Modi v. DLF Universal Ltd. Anr 2005 SC it was held that section 20 is a residuary provision i.e. it deals with the cases which are not related to immovable property or movable property. As per this provision the plaintiff can file a suit at a place where cause of action lies.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that A can sue B for the price and file a suit for the same in Calcutta i.e. where the cause of action has arose. A may also sue B in Delhi because that is the place where B(defendant) voluntarily resides.

    11 Dec 2023
    Question :- The Officer-in-Charge of a police station was informed of commission of dacoity on the telephone. He immediately rushed to the spot and recorded the detailed statement of the complainant. Will the statement be treated as FIR? Give reasons.

    Answer:-
    As per section 154 Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred as CrPC) states about the information as to the commission of cognizable offence. When an informant gives information to the officer in charge of the police station and that information is related to the commission of a cognizable offence then such information is known as the First Information Report. As per the rules of law to amount to an FIR it has to be the first detailed information which must be given by the informant.

    If an information which is even though the first information but is not a detailed one shall not be considered as a first information report. The logic behind this is that FIR being a substantive piece of evidence has to be detailed and exhaustive i.e. the informant must mention his name, the place of offence etc. exhaustively.

    In the case of Surajit Sarkar v. State of West Bengal (2012 SC) the concept of cryptic information or cryptic FIR was given. Cryptic information is the FIR or information which is not detailed information. It can be information given over the phone call by a person who did not disclose his name. It was held that in the cases of cryptic information it will not be considered as a valid FIR as per section 154 CrPC as it is not detailed. It has been held that if we consider the cryptic information as an FIR then the detailed information recorded by the police officer on the spot will be hit by section 162 CrPC as being the statement in the course of investigation and cannot be used as evidence in the case. Therefore to prevent this situation it was held that cryptic information is not a valid FIR as per section 154 CrPC.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that the information recorded by the police officer about commission of dacoity over the phone shall not be a valid FIR being cryptic information. The information that the police officer recorded on the spot will be the FIR as per section 154 CrPC.

    9 Dec 2023
    Question :- State if any offence has been committed in the following cases:
    (i)A intending to murder B buys a gun and loads it.
    (ii)A intending to murder B fires a gun at B.
    (iii)A intending to murder B by poison purchases poison and mixes the same with food, which remains in A’s possession.
    (iv) A serves the poisoned food to B with the knowledge of its being poisoned.
    (v)A woman, with intention of committing suicide runs towards a well, but there she was caught by a person was caught by a person.

    Answer:-
    (i) In the given facts A has brought a gun and has loaded it. This amounts to preparation to commit murder. As per IPC the preparation to commit murder is not punishable rather the attempt to commit murder is punishable under section 307 IPC. Attempt means when the accused commits any act towards the commission of the offence. Before the commission of such act there is no punishment is given as it is a stage of mere preparation. Therefore merely purchasing a gun and loading it is not punishable as it is a preparation.

    (ii) In the present facts A fires at B. This amounts to attempt to murder. A’s act will be actual commission of murder when B dies. But till B actually dies it will be attempt to murder. As soon as A fires at B now the situation is out of A’s control and it cannot be controlled by A. Now if due to external circumstances the bullet misses B or B does not die then A will be liable for attempt to murder under section 307 IPC.

    (iii) In the present facts when A purchased poison and mixed it in the food it is still the stage of preparation. Until the food with poison is in A’s possession he will not be liable as he is in the stage of preparation. But as soon as A hands over the plate to B then such an act towards the commission of the offence then he shall be liable for an attempt to murder. Therefore here A will not be liable for any offence as he is still in the preparation stage.

    (iv) In the present facts the moment A handed over the plate to B he is then in the stage of attempt to murder. As soon as the food with poison goes out of the possession of A then even though B does not consume the food due to external circumstances then also A would be liable for the offence of attempt to murder.

    (v) In the present case when A woman, with intention of committing suicide runs towards a well, but there she was caught by a person was caught by a person it will not amount to attempt to suicide. The reason behind this is that attempt is when the accused commits an act towards the commission of the offence and the situation is then out of control. But in the present facts the woman did not jump into the well and was just running towards it. If she would have jumped into the well and then due to some fact was saved then she would have been liable for the offence of attempt to suicide under section 309 IPC.

    Therefore in the present facts she will not be liable for any offence as she is in the stage of preparation only.

    8 Dec 2023
    Question :- Discuss the scope of right of private defence of body under the Indian Penal Code. Can an accused rely on the plea of private defence without specifically pleading it?

    Answer:-
    Right to private defence has been given under section 96 to 106 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter known as IPC). Right to private defence is a right to defend or to protect one’s life or property when faced with danger.
    Section 97 of IPC states that the right to private defence can be used in order to protect one’s own body or to protect the body of some other person.
    Also in the exercise of right to private defence a person can either cause death or can cause any other harm except death depending upon the danger faced by him. Section 100 enumerates the circumstances in which a person who is faced with danger can even cause death of the other person. As per section 100 death can be caused in the exercise of right of private defence in the following circumstances-

    1. When there is an assault in which there is a reasonable apprehension of either death or grievous hurt.
    2. When the assault is done with the intention of causing rape, unnatural lust, kidnapping or abduction etc.
    3. When there is an assault with the intention of wrongful restraint which causes him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release.
    4. When there is an act of throwing or administering acid or an attempt to throw or administer acid which may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such act.

    Also in section 101 it has been stated that in all the situations other that those which are enumerated under section 100, in the exercise of right to private defence, can cause any other harm except causation of death. As per section 102 IPC it has been stated that the right to private defence to body can be used or exercised until the apprehension continues. As soon as the apprehension is over then afterwards the right to private defence cannot be validly exercised.
    Any defence which has been mentioned under Chapter IV must be specifically pleaded by the accused and it cannot be relied upon without proving it. As it is mentioned under section 105 of the Indian Evidence Act that the accused has the burden to prove the existence of general exception. The Court shall presume the absence of the general exception.

    7 Dec 2023
    Question :- 'A' offered by letter to buy his nephew F's horse for Rs. 10,000 adding that 'If I hear no more about this I shall consider the horse to be mine at Rs. 10,000.&' No answer was returned to this letter but F told B an auctioneer to keep the horse out of sale of his farm stock, as he intended to reserve it for his uncle A. B sold the horse by mistake. 'A' sues F for breach of contract and claims compensation. Decide.

    Answer:-
    As per section 2(b) of the Indian Contract that acceptance is when the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto. Here the word signifies has been used which makes it compulsory that the assent has to be communicated to the other person. This clearly states that the silence does not amount to acceptance.

    A person to whom the proposal is made is under no duty to accept the proposal. Law does not cast a duty upon any person to speak up the acceptance. A person is free to give or not to give the acceptance.

    In the case of Felthouse v. Bindley (1862) it was held that silence does not amount to acceptance. The only situation when silence can be treated as acceptance is when a person has the duty to speak.

    The present problem in question is based upon the facts of Felthouse v. Bindley. Therefore A’s claim against F shall not lie because F was not under any duty to accept the proposal made by A. here even though F had the intention to accept the proposal as he told B an auctioneer to keep the horse out of sale of his farm stock, as he intended to reserve it for his uncle A.

    As there was not acceptance to the proposal made by A hence F is not liable to pay any compensation to him and there is not binding contract between them.

    6 Dec 2023
    Question :- 'A' obtained a decree ex-parte against 'B' and in execution of the decree brought the properties of 'B' to sale and himself became the purchaser. On appeal by 'B', the appellant court set aside the decree and remanded the suit for re-hearing. Then 'B' applied for restitution. While that application was pending, 'A' then contended that as the suit had been decreed, no restitution can be granted. Is 'B' entitled to restitution?

    Answer:-
    As per section 144 of the Civil Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as CPC) the remedy is restitution has been given to the applicant who applies for it.

    Restitution means to restore. Restoration here implies the act of returning the benefit which has been received. As per section 144 CPC if any decree or order has been varied, modified or is set aside then any person can file an application under section 144 of the CPC for restitution. In this the court to which the application has been made shall order restitution to the person who is entitled to the benefit. This is done in order to put the parties in the same position in which they were or they would have been if the decree or order would not have modified, varied or set aside.

    For the purpose of restitution the court may make any order i.e. refund of cost, payment of interest, payment of damages, payment of compensation, payment of mesne profits etc.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that the ex parte decree has been set aside by the appellant court. Upon such setting aside B is entitled to the benefit of property which has been received by A under the ex parte decree.

    Therefore the application for restitution by B under section 144 CPC is valid and he will be entitled to the relief of restitution.

    5 Dec 2023
    Question :- Arbitrariness and equality are sworn enemies. Explain.

    Answer:-
    Arbitrariness is the unfair and unlimited use of personal power. Arbitrariness is an action that is done without reason or principle. It is done on the will of the person. Arbitrariness always comes along with unjust and unfair.

    Equality is a cornerstone of Indian democracy. Equality is the rule of law in a republic. It means treating each individual equally without any biasness towards anyone. Equality always negates arbitrariness because the essence of equality lies in justice, equity and fairness.

    In the case of EP Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974 SC) it was held that equality is antithetic to arbitrariness. Equality can never be seen in isolate rather it has to be seen with the other factors.

    Prior to this case all the fundamental rights were seen in isolation. Article 14 provides with equality but it was limited to the rules of article 14 i.e. rule of law, reasonable classification etc. but after this judgement the principles of justice, liberty, equality, fairness were given a broader approach. It was held that all the fundamental right are like overarching principle as they are running across each other and cutting each other.

    Therefore where there is equality then the arbitrariness does not have any place. If a principle promotes equality then the arbitrariness has to be kept aside.

    Also it was held that Equality is a dynamic concept with many aspects and dimensions and it cannot be cribbed cabined and confined within traditional and doctrinaire limits. From a positivistic point of view, equality is antithetic to arbitrariness.

    2 Dec 2023
    Question:-Defendant offered to sell a house on 25-11-89 to plaintiff for 90,000/. On 10-12-89 plaintiff made offer of 80,000/-. This offer was refused by defendant owner on 15-12-89. On 20-12-89 plaintiff wrote to defendant that he was now prepared to pay Rs. 90,000. Defendant owner refused to sell the house. Plaintiff filed suit against defendant for breach of contract. How would you decide?

    Answer:-
    As per section 2(b) of the Indian Contract Act it has been stated that when a person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto then he is said to have given an acceptance.

    In the given definition the term “thereto” means the acceptance will be a valid acceptance only when it has been given for the same proposal which has been made to the acceptor. As per section 7 the acceptor is duty bound to accept the same proposal which has been made to him without adding or deleting any of the condition of the proposal. If the acceptor changes any condition of the proposal then it does not amount to a valid acceptance rather it amounts to an implied rejection of the original offer. When the acceptor accepts the offer by changing the conditions it is known as a counter offer. And whenever a counter offer is made the original offer is cancelled.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it shall be concluded that when 10- 12-89 plaintiff made an offer to the defendant to purchase for rs. 80000 this amounted to counter offer and not acceptance as he changed the terms of the offer.

    In the case of Hyde v. Wrench it was held that a proposal once rejected comes to an end. Therefore when on 10-12-89 the plaintiff made a counter offer to the defendant then the original offer stands cancelled or rejected. Therefore the plaintiff’s claim against the defendant will not be successful as there was no binding contract between the plaintiff and the defendant.

    1 Dec 2023
    Question:-Sanjoy cuts down a tree on Vijoy’s ground with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of Vijoy’s possession without the consent of Vijoy. Sanjoy is prosecuted for the offence of theft. Sanjoy takes the defence that the offence of theft can be committed in respect of only a movable property and as the tree is not a movable property, he cannot be convicted for ‘theft’. Is Sanjoy guilty for the offence of theft? Give reasons.

    Answer:-
    As per section 378 IPC theft is an offence when a person mover a movable property out of the possession of the other person’s possession without such person’s consent. This moving or taking must be done with dishonest intention to deprive the other person of his property wrongfully.

    Also explanation I to section 378 IPC states that if any property is attached to the earth then it cannot amount to theft of such property as theft can be done against movable property only. But it has been clarified in that explanation that once the property is severed from earth then it becomes capable of being the subject of theft as soon as it is severed from the earth.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that when Sanjoy had cut down the tree on the Vijoy’s land with the intention to take it with him without Vijoy’s consent amounts to theft under section 378 and punishable under section 379 IPC.

    Also applying the explanation I to the present facts it can be concluded that even though a tree is not a movable property but as soon as it is severed from the land it becomes movable and capable of being the subject matter of theft.

    30 Nov 2023
    Question:-Hearsay evidence is not admissible. Explain. What are the exceptions to the rule?

    Answer:-
    The best evidence rule states that the direct evidence always excludes hearsay evidence or indirect evidence. Direct evidence means such evidence of a fact which can be directly perceived by any of his senses. On the other hand hearsay evidence means indirect evidence which is not directly perceived. When any person has seen an incident and then he tells it to some other person then if such person gives evidence of such incident then it will be hearsay evidence.
    A fact which is not directly perceived is not admissible in evidence as it has been stated in section 60 that oral evidence must always be direct and not indirect.
    The rationale behind this best evidence rule that hearsay evidence is not reliable as it is not directly perceived. The person giving evidence of such hearsay fact may manipulate the facts and will not feel responsible towards it as he has not seen it directly. Also the person cannot be cross examined on the basis of hearsay fact stated by him.
    EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE
    There are certain exceptions to it. These are as follows-
    1. Dying declaration
    2. Opinions of experts
    3. Admissions and confessions
    4. Res gestae
    5. Statements of persons, who cannot be found, are incapable of coming to the court etc.
    Note- but technically dying declaration is not an exception as the statement of a person who is now dead is directly heard and recorded by the person who is giving evidence of such statement in the court.

    29 Nov 2023
    Question:- All contracts are agreements but all agreements are not contract. Explain.

    Answer:-
    The above stated fact is a manifestation of a cause and effect relationship between the agreement and contract.

    As per section 2 (e) of the Indian Contract Act an agreement is a promise or set of promises forming consideration for each other. Also as per section 2(h) of the act a contract is an agreement which is enforceable by law. Therefore for a contract an agreement is necessary first. Only after becoming a valid agreement then it can be converted into a valid contract.

    An agreement will become a valid contract when it can be legally enforced by the parties. Legal enforceability here means that the contract in order to be a valid contract has to fulfil the ingredients of a valid contract as per section 10 of the Act.

    Section 10 of the Act states that an agreement will convert into a contract the following essential feature must be followed-

    1. Free consent- an agreement will be a contract in which the consent of both the parties is free. Consent means meeting of minds i.e. agreeing upon the same thing in the same sense. The consent of both the parties must be free from any effect of coercion, undue influence, misrepresentation, fraud or mistake.

    2. Competent parties- the parties to the contract must be competent. Competency as per section 11 and 12 means that the parties must be major. Also the parties must not be of unsound mind and must not have been disqualified by law.

    3. Lawful consideration- the consideration of the agreement must be lawful as per section 23 of the act i.e. it must not be against the provision of law or must not defeat the law or must not be immoral or against public policy.

    4. Lawful object- the object of the agreement must also be lawful as per section 23 of the act i.e. it must not be against the provision of law or must not defeat the law or must not be immoral or against public policy. 5. Not expressly declared as void- the agreement must not be such which has been expressly declared as a void agreement under section 26 to 30 of the Act.

    28 Nov 2023
    Question:- What are the major commitments of the Constitution of India as incorporated in its preamble?

    Answer:-
    The Preamble to the Indian Constitution is the introduction to the Constitution. It gives the objects and the aims that the Constitution sought to achieve. Also it tells about the intention of the constituent assembly that what the makers of the constitution wanted to achieve.

    As it was held in the case of Re Berubari (1960) it was held that the Preamble is the key to open the minds of the makers of the Constitution.

    There are various major commitments incorporated in the Indian Constitution. These are as follows-

    1. Sovereign- in the preamble the people of India resolve to create a nation which will be a sovereign. The term sovereign means that a nation which is an independent nation i.e. which is not dependent on the foreign nations and is a self-reliant one.

    2. Socialist- socialist here refers to social democracy and social justice. It means achievement of socialistic goals. It also signifies the concept of distributive justice.

    3. Secular- it is also an inherent feature of the Indian Constitution. It means that the State will not have any religion of its own. This also means that the state shall not favour any religion rather each and every religion is equal in the eyes of the State.

    4. Democratic- this is a feature of the Indian Constitution which implies that the representatives in our nation are appointed for the people, by the people and of the people. The people of India elect their governments by a system of universal adult franchise, popularly known as one person one vote.

    5. Republic- In a republican form of government, the head of state is elected and not a hereditary monarch. Thus, this word denotes a government where no one holds public power as a proprietary right. As opposed to a monarchy, in which the head of state is appointed on a hereditary basis for life or until abdication, a democratic republic is an entity in which the head of state is elected, directly or indirectly, for a fixed tenure.

    6. Justice- the ultimate aim of the Constitution of India is to attain the Justice. Justice here includes the social justice, economic justice and political justice.

    7. Liberty- this is also one of the resolution of the Preamble. Liberty here means freedom of action. Liberty includes liberty of thought, belief, faith and worship.

    8. Equality- the preamble also motivates the principle of equality among the individuals. Equality here means the equality of status and equality of opportunities.

    9. Fraternity, unity and integrity- also it is the object of the Constitution to encourage the feeling of brotherhood among the individuals. Also the preamble aims to promote that the dignity of the individuals is also maintained.

    27 Nov 2023
    Question:-‘A’ sends a price list of goods to ‘B’ on the latter’s request. B places an order on dealer A for goods specified in the price list on prices quoted in said list. A did not execute orders for supply. What is B’s remedy, if any?

    Answer:-
    The concept involved in the question is the law related to invitation to proposal or invitation to offer.

    Invitation to offer means when the person is not making a proposal rather he is just sharing information about something. Invitation to offer is not a part of the formation of a contract because contract starts from the very root i.e. the proposal. In invitation to proposal the intention is not to obtain the assent but to invite the other person to make a proposal. It is mere sharing of information which can be interpreted by construction. The intention has to be seen. The consequence of the invitation to proposal is that the person, to whom the proposal is made, makes a proposal for the same. Whereas in proposal the consequence is that the person to whom gives his acceptance for the same.

    In the case of Pharmaceuticals Society of Great Britain v. Boot Cash Chemist (1953) it was held that when the goods are displayed on shelves then it amounts to a mere invitation to proposal and there cannot be a binding contract merely on the basis of such invitation.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that when A sent a pricelist to of goods to B it was an invitation to offer. When B placed an order to A of the goods mentioned in the pricelist then it amounts to a proposal. It will not be a binding contract until A gives acceptance for the same. Therefore B will not get any remedy until A gives his acceptance.

    25 Nov 2023
    Question:-A in great fire pulls down houses in order to prevent the conflagration from spreading. A did it in good faith, saving the life and property and to avoid greater harm. What offence, if any, is made out in this case? Give legal provision.

    Answer:-
    As per section 81 of Indian Penal Code 1860 if any person commits an act without any criminal intention in good faith and in order to prevent any bigger harm from being committed then it will not amount to an offence and the person will be completely excused from his liability.

    Section 81 is a manifestation of the principle of necessity. In this if person causes harm by committing any act only with the intention of preventing a bigger harm from being committed then it is a situation of necessity and he must not be penalised.

    In the case of Queen v. Dudley and Stephen (1884) and US v. Holmes (1842) it was held that the defence of necessity can be availed in cases of public necessity and not for private necessity or for your own necessity. Public necessity here means the act must be done for the benefit of some other person.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that when A in great fire pulled down the houses in order to prevent the fire from spreading is an act of necessity as he is acting here in good faith i.e. for saving the life and property of others. Also he did not have any criminal intention and he pulled the roofs of houses in order to prevent a bigger harm from being committed.

    Therefore A shall not be liable for any offence and his act will be completely excused from criminal liability.

    24 Nov 2023
    Question:-What is the rule of Res gestae? How has the Indian Evidence Act recognised this rule?

    Answer:-
    Res gestae is a latin term which literally means that part of the same transaction. This is a concept from English law which means that the facts which form the part of same transaction are relevant to each other. The concept of res gestae was propounded in the case of R v. Andrews. In this case the judgement of Ratton v. R was followed.

    The general principle of res gestae is manifest in section 6, 7 and 8 of the Indian Evidence act. In these sections the facts which even though in themselves are not facts in issue but they are relevant because they are motive, effect, preparation, cause etc. and are a part of same transaction and hence part of res gestae.

    The phrase “part of the same transaction” has been expressly used in section 6 of the Act. Section 6 manifestly deals with the concept of res gestae.

    As per section 6 a fact shall be relevant if it is a part of same transaction. Here the facts may not be the fact in issue in themselves but they are a part of the same transaction. Also it does not matter that whether those facts occurred at same time or place or different time or place still they will be relevant under section 6 of they are a part of the same transaction.

    The important factor to be determined here is when the transaction started and when did it end. It is between the continuance of such transaction that all the facts shall be relevant. There is hard and fast rule as to the starting and ending of the transaction rather it is a question of fact. The facts which are spontaneously, naturally connected to each other or are so connected that there is not manipulation are said to be a part of same transaction.

    This principle was followed by the court in the landmark judgement of Sawal Das v. State of Bihar (1974).

    23 Nov 2023
    Question:-Proposal lies in the very roots of the formation of contract. Explain.

    Answer:-
    The above mentioned statement is a manifestation of the fact that the procedure of the formation of contract starts from the stage of proposal. Proposal is the first step to form a contract.

    Merely having an intention to obtain the assent is not sufficient rather proposal is complete when it is communicated to the person to whom it is made. Therefore proposal is that point from where the contract formation starts.

    When the proposal is communicated to the person to whom it is made accepts the same then it gets converted into a promise. The manifestation of this lies in the language of section 2(b) i.e. a proposal when accepted becomes a promise. A mere promise is not binding rather it can be enforced only when it becomes an agreement. To convert a promise into an agreement consideration has to be added to a promise. When we add some value to the promise then it becomes an agreement.

    A mere agreement is not a contract. Rather as per section 2(h) of the Indian Contract Act only such agreements are contracts which are legally enforceable. Therefore agreements which can be legally enforced by the parties in the court of law then such agreements finally become contracts.

    Hence it is justified to state that proposal lies in the roots of the formation of the contract.

    22 Nov 2023
    Question:-A in great fire pulls down houses in order to prevent the conflagration from spreading. A did it in good faith, saving the life and property and to avoid greater harm. What offence, if any, is made out in this case? Give legal provision.

    Answer:-
    Section 81 of the Indian Penal Code states about defence of public necessity. As per the said provision it is stated that when any person without any criminal intention and with the knowledge that it is likely to cause harm does an act and causes harm with the purpose or avoiding other harm, he shall not be liable for any offence. For application of section 81 the act must have been done in good faith.

    Public necessity in section 81 means the situation when a person considers it necessary to cause a smaller harm in order to prevent a bigger harm. Therefore the act must be done as a matter of public necessity and not private necessity. Hence it is important that the person must be acting under good faith i.e with due care and caution.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it may be concluded that in the present facts the act of A pulling down the houses in order to prevent the fire from spreading is an act of necessity. Also it is evident in the facts that he was acting in good faith as he is doing the act in order to save the life and properties of others. Also A’s act was done in order to prevent a bigger harm from being committed.

    Therefore it can be concluded that A shall not be liable for any offence as his act of pulling the houses down shall be excused under section 81 of the IPC.

    21 Nov 2023
    Question:-Point out whether in the following cases the facts sought to be proved are relevant.
    (i) A is charged with shooting at B with intent to kill him. In order to prove A's intent the prosecution wants to prove the fact that A has earlier shot one C.
    (ii) A is tried for rioting and is proved to have marched at the head of the mob; the prosecution wants to prove that the mob was shouting.

    Answer:-
    (i) Section 14 Indian Evidence Act states about the state of mind, state of body and bodily feeling. It states that intention is a mental element or state of mind and is relevant under section 14. But explanation 1 of section 14 states that whenever we talk about the relevancy of intention as a fact then it has to be examined that the intention existed against that particular person and not against any other persons in general. Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that the fact that A has the intention to kill B is a relevant fact under section 14 of the Act. But as per explanation 1 the fact that earlier A has shot C is not relevant to prove A’s intention against B because intention must be specifically towards a particular person and not a general one. Therefore this fact is irrelevant under section 14.

    (ii) Section 9 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with the facts which are explanatory. Explanatory facts are those which explain the fact in issue or relevant fact.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that the fact that mob which was being headed by A was shouting or crying is relevant under section 9 of the Act. The fact that A was heading the mob and the mob or the people of the mob were crying explains the fact in issue that the A was rioting.

    Therefore this fact is a relevant fact under section 9 of the Act.

    20 Nov 2023
    Question:-What do you understand by the doctrine of ‘feeding the grant by estoppel’?

    Answer:-
    Feeding of grant by estoppel has its essence in the principle of estoppel. It means that when one person has made a representation and the other person has relied upon it and has altered his position, then the person making the statement cannot retract his statement. This is based upon the principle of equity and justice.

    Feeding of grant by estoppel means that when a person has transferred an immovable property to any person by falsely stating that he is authorised to transfer and the opposite person has relied upon that statement then afterwards the transferor has to execute the transfer of property by the interest that he acquires.

    This doctrine is derived from another Latin maxim ‘nemo dat quod non habet’ which means ‘no one can confer a better or higher right to property than what he himself possesses’. Section 43 is an exception to this maxim. This doctrine has its manifestation in section 43 of transfer of property act.

    As per section 43 of the act the following are the conditions to be fulfilled- 1. There has to be a fraudulent or erroneous transfer of immovable property. It is not required that the transferor has deliberately transferred with defective title rather it will be sufficient if mistakenly he has transferred the property having defective title. 2. The transferee has a right to get the transfer executed against the transferor through the title that he subsequently acquires. This is due to the application of the doctrine of estoppel.

    18 Nov 2023
    Question:-A attempts to rescue B from the custody of police and while making such attempt caused grievous hurt to constable C and simple hurt to constable D.

    Answer:-
    As per section 218 CrPC generally for each offence separate charge shall be framed. Section 219 is an exception to the general rule.

    In some cases even though the offences are different but they can be charged together. As per section 219 if a person has committed different offence but these offences are committed in the same transaction then the charges can be joined. But for this the offences must be of same kind. Also it is a requirement that the offences must have been committed within twelve months and the number of offences must not exceed three.
    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be stated that A has committed attempted to cause grievous hurt to C and hurt to D i.e. he has committed the offences of the same kind. Also he has committed these offences in the same transaction.
    Hence as per section 219, A can be charged for attempting to cause grievous hurt and actually causing simple hurt jointly.

    17 Nov 2023
    Question:-A wants to kill B with arsenic poison and with that purpose he administers sugar to him in food, believing the sugar to be arsenic. Discuss the liability of A.

    Answer:-
    The legal point involved in the given problem lies in section 511 Indian Penal Code. The concept involved here is criminal attempt. Attempt basically is the second last stage of a crime. The attempt of any offence is punishable under IPC. If there are no specific sections for attempt in the IPC then such attempt will be covered under section 511.

    As per section 511 a person shall be held liable for attempt of an offence if he has done some act towards the commission of the offence. In such cases the actual commission of the offence is not required rather the person must have committed an act towards the actual commission and then due to the external interferences the offence could not be finally completed. Also the possibility of the happening of the offence is not mandatory. It will not be examined that whether the offence was actually possible or not rather it was examined that whether the accused believed his act to be sufficient for the commission of that offence or not.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that when a person with the intention to kill administers poison to the other person but that was actually not poison rather it was sugar, so the point to be considered here is not whether the offence was possible or not rather the point to be considered here is whether the accused believed his preparation to be sufficient for the actual commission of the offence.

    Therefore it can be concluded here that in the present case the accused had the intention to kill B and with such intention he administered poison in his food. He believed his act to be sufficient in order to commit the offence. Hence he would be liable for attempt to murder.

    16 Nov 2023
    Question:-Write a short note on Doctrine of Supervening impossibility.

    Answer:-
    Introduction The doctrine of supervening impossibility has been given under section 56 of the Indian Contract Act. This literally means that the contract was not impossible from the very beginning rather subsequently it became impossible due to the uncertainties. This doctrine is dealt with under section 56 para 2 Indian Contract Act. It has been stated that the contract always frustrates because of impossibility. As per section 56 there may be a situation in which the contract initially is valid but due to the subsequent impossibility or due to some situation which the party cannot control, the contract becomes illegal to be performed. In such situations the contract which was initially valid subsequently becomes void due to illegality or impossibility. The impossibility can be of various types. Following are the types of impossibilities which are recognised under the law of contract.

    1. Physical impossibility- The contract may become impossible due to physical impossibility. It means that the contract has become impossible to be performed.  Physical impossibility may be that the subject matter of the contract was destroyed (taylor v. Caldwell)  Also the contract can become physically impossible due to the fact that the event for which the contract was entered into did not happen (Krell v. Henry)  It also covers the situation that the parties died or became incapable of physically performing the contract (Robinson v. Davison).

    2. Legal impossibility- Also the contract in some situations may be legally impossible. This means that after the making of the contract the law changed and made the contract impossible to be performed. Subsequent to the change in law the contract becomes illegal and hence impossible.

    3. Practical impossibility- Also the impossibility may be a practical impossibility which means that even though the contract is physically possible but the actual performance is not rational or feasible (Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur).

    15 Nov 2023
    Question:-Discuss the trial procedure of sessions court in detail?

    Answer:- The procedure of sessions trial has been given under section 225- 237 CrPC. In these provisions the process of sessions trial has been discussed in detail.

    Following are the provisions related to the process of sessions trial-

    1. The case in a sessions trial is always opened by the prosecutions. The prosecution opens the case by briefing the court about the details and facts of the case. The prosecutor shall open his case by describing the charge brought against the accused and stating by what evidence he proposes to prove the guilt of the accused.

    2. If based upon the record of the case and the documents submitted, and after hearing the submissions of the accused and the prosecution if the Judge considers that there is not sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, he shall discharge the accused and record his reasons for so doing.

    3. If the accused is not discharged and the Judge is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence which is exclusively triable by the Court of Session then he shall frame a charge. If the case is not exclusively triable by the the court of session then the judge may frame a charge against the accused and, by order, transfer the case for trial to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, or any other Judicial Magistrate of the first class and direct the accused to appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, or the Judicial Magistrate of the first class.

    4. After hearing the charges if the accused pleads guilty then the judge shall record his plea and convict him on plea of guilt. 5. Then the court shall send the summons to the prosecution witnesses and for prosecution evidences. Then the prosecution shall produce its witnesses and evidences. Also the court will examine the accused personally under section 313. On the basis of the prosecution evidence and the examination of the accused if the judge is of the opinion that the accused has not committed any offence then he shall record an order of acquittal.

    6. When the accused is not acquitted then the court will call him to defend him and to produce the evidences in this behalf. The court will issue the summons to the witnesses and the defence will produce the evidences in this regard.

    7. Finally the prosecution and the defence shall have the final arguments. The prosecutor shall sum up the case and the accused or his pleader shall be entitled to reply.

    8. The last step of the procedure of the Court of Session trial is the judgement. After hearing arguments and points of law, the Judge shall give a judgment in the case.

    11 Nov 2023
    Question:-A, by putting Z in fear of grievous hurt, dishonestly induces Z to sign or affix his seal to a lank paper and deliver it to A. Z signs and delivers the paper to A. Here, paper so signed may be converted into a valuable security. What offence, if any, has been committed by A? Support your answer with the help of law and reasons.

    A. Section 383 of the Indian Penal Code defines the offence of extortion. Extortion means that when any person puts another person under the fear of injury and induces the person so put in fear to deliver the property. The inducement if given to deliver something which is a valuable security or something which can be converted into a valuable security then that would also amount to extortion.

    The term injury here is defined under section 44 as an injury which is caused to the body, mind, reputation or property of an individual. Also the term valuable security as defined under section 30 IPC as any document in which any legal right is created, extended, transferred, restricted, extinguished or released, or whereby any person acknowledges that he lies under legal liability, or has not a certain legal right.

    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that in the present facts in hand A had put Z in fear of grievous hurt. Here grievous hurt amounts to fear of injury as per the definition under section 44 as it is a fear to cause harm to the body illegally.

    Also the fear must be caused in order to induce the person to deliver the movable property or any other valuable security. In the present case in hand the fear of grievous hurt has been caused in order to induce Z to sign on a blank paper. Here blank paper even though prima facie is not a property or any valuable security but it can definitely be converted into a valuable security and hence is covered under the conditions of the offence of extortion.

    And under that fear Z signed on the blank paper.

    Therefore it can be concluded that in the present case A has committed the offence of extortion under section 383 and it is punishable under section 384 IPC.

    10 Nov 2023
    Question:-What do you understand by a foreign judgment? In what manner may decree of a Foreign Court be executed in India?

    The term foreign judgement has been defined under section 2(6) as the judgement of the foreign court. Foreign court has been defined under section 2(5) as the court which is situated outside India and not established within the territory of India. A judgement given by any foreign court shall be conclusive between the parties to the suit.

    The conclusiveness of the judgement shall be for the matter which has been adjudicated by that foreign court in such judgement. That shall be conclusive between the parties to the suit or between the persons who are litigating under the parties to the suit. There are certain exceptions to the main rule stated above. These are the situations in

    which the judgements of the foreign court are not conclusive proof-

    1. When the court passing the judgement does not have the jurisdiction i.e territorial or pecuniary.

    2. When the judgement has not been given on the merits. Merits here mean that the parties did not get an opportunity to present the case or there was a material defect or irregularity in the case.

    3. When the judgement has been given upon the incorrect view of international law. Also where in the judgement there is a refusal to recognise the Indian law that is in force.

    4. The proceedings of that particular judgement are opposed to the principles of natural justice. Here principles of natural justice means that each party must get an opportunity to represent his case and there must be a reasoned judgement.

    5. When the foreign judgement has been obtained on the basis of fraud.

    6. When the judgement results into the breach of any law in India.

    As per section 43 of the CPC the judgement of the foreign court which is established by any authority outside India shall be executed in the same manner which is provided for the territory to which this law applies. If such foreign court is located in any reciprocating territory then as per section 44A it can be executed in the same manner as if it has been passed by the District Court.

    9 Nov 2023
    Question:-Discuss the provisions related to framing of charges and contents of charges.

    Charges mean the accusations upon the accused persons as to the offences that he has committed. The charges are framed by the Magistrate. After the framing of charges the trial starts and the inquiry stage is over. Section 211 to 224 CrPC provides for the rules related to the framing of charges. The policy behind framing of charges lies in the rules of principles of natural justice. This means that as per the rule of audi alterum partem i.e. nobody shall be condemned unheard charges are framed in order to make the accused person aware of the accusations that are put upon him so that he can defend himself in a proper manner.

    Contents of charges

    As per section 211 of CrPC it has been stated that every charge must specifically state the offence which the accused has committed as per the evidences gathered against him. Also if the law under which such offence has been given defines such an offence by a different name then the charge must specify such name and define it accordingly. The charge must contain the law and the section under which such offence has been punished in the Indian Penal code. The charge shall be written in the language of the court. The language which has been used in the charge must be the formal language which has been used in the section and must be according to the format. If the accused has been previously convicted of some other offence then the date, place etc of the commission of such offence must be mentioned in the charge. Also if the accused shall be subject to enhanced punishment or some different kind of punishment then this fact must be specifically mentioned in the charge.

    Also as per section 212 the charge must also contain the particulars as to the time and place and the person against whom the offence has been committed. Also as per section 213 if it is required that the manner of the commission of the offence has to be given then such manner must also be stated in the charge.

    8 Nov 2023
    Question:- What do you mean by common intention? Differentiate it from common object.

    common intention is given under section 34 of the Indian Penal code. This is the principle of joint liability under criminal law. Common intention means having shared the same intention. Common intention is when two or more persons have the consensus as idem regarding the act that they want to commit.
    As per section 34 IPC when two or more persons commit a criminal act in furtherance of common intention then each of such person shall be held liable for the commission of the offence in the same manner as if it done by him alone.
    Therefore following are the ingredients of section 34-
    1. There must be prior meeting of minds between the accused persons. The meeting of mind can be specific or prior and it can even be made on the spot. It need not be distinct and specific.
    2. The persons have committed the criminal act in furtherance of common intention. In furtherance here means that the act must be committed in the extension of the common intention that they have shared.
    3. The accused persons must be actively participating. Active participation here does not mean mere physical presence rather it means the act done by the accused.

    Difference between common intention and common object

    COMMON INTENTION COMMON OBJECT
    It has been given under section 34 IPC. It has been given under section 149 IPC.
    In this the criminal intention must be done in furtherance of common intention. The act towards the common object must be done in prosecution of common object.
    The accused must be actively participating. The members of the unlawful assembly must be physically present on the spot.

    7 Nov 2023
    Question:- What are the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code regarding the place of trial in criminal cases? What is the correct place of trial in the following case?
    A is charged and tried at Delhi with wrongfully concealing a kidnapped person. The kidnapping took place at Delhi but the concealment occurred in Shimla.

    The jurisdiction in a criminal trial is very important. The reason is that for a correct procedure it is very important that the criminal case is filed in the correct court. There are provisions related to jurisdiction in the criminal procedure code. Therefore in a criminal case the jurisdiction is decided as per the rules given from section 177 to section 189 crpc.
    As per section 177 it has been declared that each offence must be tried within the jurisdiction of that court where the offence has been committed.
    But there are certain exceptions to the general rule which has been given under section 177-

    1. As per section 178 if the offence has been committed partially in one area and partially in other area then the jurisdiction of both the courts is established. Where the offence is a continuing one and it continues in more than one area or it is committed in several acts then each of the court shall have the jurisdiction.

    2. When the offence which is committed is the consequence of an act or is in relation to the other act then the courts of all the respective areas shall have the jurisdiction.

    3. When the offence which is committed is kidnapping then the court within the territory of which the person is taken or conveyed will have the jurisdiction. The same rule applies in the commission of the offence of theft, receiving stolen property, dealing with stolen property etc.

    4. If the offence has been committed in letters then the courts within the territory of which the letters were sent or received shall have the jurisdiction.

    As per section 181 it is stated that when any person has been kidnapped then the courts of the places in which the kidnapping has been committed or the person has been conveyed or abducted shall have the jurisdiction. All the respective courts shall have the parallel jurisdiction to try the case.
    Applying the above law to the present facts it can be concluded that the courts of both Delhi as well as Shimla shall have the jurisdiction to try the case of kidnapping. The reason is that as per section 181 A was kidnapped in Delhi but conveyed in Shimla and hence the both the courts shall have the jurisdiction.

    6 Nov 2023
    Question:-Define Criminal Conspiracy. What are its essential ingredients?

    The offence of criminal conspiracy is an inchoate offence. The policy behind inchoate offences is to prevent the offence from being committed. Therefore even before the main offence is committed the act is punishable under IPC.
    In criminal conspiracy also the actual commission of the illegal act is not mandatory rather it is the mere agreement to commit an illegal act which shall be punishable.
    Criminal conspiracy has been defined under section 120A of the IPC. As per this provision the criminal conspiracy is an agreement in which two or more persons agree to commit an illegal act or a legal act but by illegal means. For the offence under section 120A mere agreement is the actus reus.

    Essential ingredients of criminal conspiracy
    1. Two or more persons agree- one of the most essential ingredients of the offence of criminal conspiracy is that there has to be an agreement i.e. there has to be consensus ad idem between two persons. The offence of criminal conspiracy cannot be committed otherwise than as an agreement. The persons must agree to commit the illegal act.

    2. Illegal act or an act in illegal manner- the agreement between the two or more persons must be to commit an illegal act. Also it may be an agreement to commit an act in an illegal manner.

    Illegal as defined under section 43 means that anything which is an offence or which is prohibited by law or which gives ground for civil action. Therefore there are three types of criminal conspiracies under the IPC. These are criminal conspiracy to commit an offence, to commit an act which is prohibited by law and to commit an act which is a civil wrong.

    Mere agreement to commit an offence is sufficient and no further act is required to punish a person for criminal conspiracy. Whereas in criminal conspiracy to commit an act which is prohibited by law or which gives ground for civil action mere agreement is not the actus reus rather an act in furtherance is needed to be committed.

    4 Nov 2023
    Question:-The rule against perpetuity is founded on the general principle or policy that the liberty of alienation shall not be exercised to its own destruction’. Discuss.

    The rule against perpetuity has been given under section 14 of the transfer of property act. The rule against perpetuity means that the property cannot be held for indefinite period of time. The basic policy behind such rule is that it is against the policy of free movement of property. This is because the alienation of property for an indefinite period of time is against the principle of justice as such alienation destroys or damages the property and also it leads to the violation of the people’s right to transfer property. In the case of Stanley v. Leigh it was held that the alienation of property for an indefinite period of time is against the policy of law and it destroys the property. Here rule against property as per the provision of section 14 of the transfer of property act means that the following conditions must be followed-
    For the rule against perpetuity to apply it has been stated that-
    1. For the lifetime of a person- the property can be transferred for the lifetime of a person. During such lifetime the person is expected to preserve the property with sue diligence.
    2. For the minority of a person- the property can also be transferred for the minority of a person i.e. for a period of eighteen years. This is the maximum time for which a property can be held or alienated i.e. for the life of a particular person and thereafter till the minority of another person.
    3. The person must be in existence on the death of the former one- the person for whose minority the property is being transferred must be in existence at the time of the death of the person for whose lifetime the property was alienated. If the person is not in existence at the time of death of the former then the property shall pass to the legal heirs of such deceased person.

    3 Nov 2023
    Question:-Tony borrowed a sum of Rs. 5000/- from John in order to bet with Mahesh as to the result of a cricket match. The betting on a cricket match is not authorized by law. Tony lost the bet to Mahesh. Tony neither paid a sum of Rs. 5000/- to Mahesh nor returned Rs. 5000/- to John. Mahesh and John initiated legal remedies against tony separately for the recovery of 5000/- . Decide.

    The main question to be determined in the present case is whether a party to an agreement enforce such agreement if such agreement is in the nature of wager’s agreement. Also it has to be determined whether the agreement in which the object was unlawful can be duly enforced or not.
    The law on this lies in section 23 and 30 of the Indian Contract Act respectively. As per section 23 of the act the agreements in which the object is unlawful then such an agreement is void. In the present problem tony has borrowed the sum of 5000 form john for the object of betting in cricket which is not lawful or not authorised by law. Therefore this agreement shall be void and John cannot enforce it and claim 5000.
    Also as per section 30 the wager’s agreement is void. Wager’s agreement here means that an agreement for an act which is an uncertain act and both the parties to the agreement have mutual chances of winning and losing in it. In the present problem the transaction between tony and Mahesh is in the nature of wager’s agreement. In the agreement of betting it is dependent upon an uncertain event and there are mutual chances of winning and losing. Therefore Mahesh cannot enforce the agreement against tony and claim 5000.

    25 Oct 2023
    Question:-When is a husband ordered to pay maintenance allowance to his wife? What order may a Magistrate pass when the husband fails to comply with the order?

    Maintenance under section 125 CrPC is given by the person to his wife, parents, minor son, and daughter etc. Section 125 states various conditions to be fulfilled to make any person liable for the payment of maintenance.
    As per section 125 the husband can be ordered to pay the maintenance to his wife when the wife is incapable to maintain herself. The wife referred to under section 125 means a wife who has been divorced by the husband or the wife who has obtained the divorce from her husband.
    If the man offers to maintain the wife but the wife refuses to live with him then the Court shall consider the grounds of such refusal. The ground that the husband keeps a mistress or has married some other woman shall be considered to be a valid ground for the woman to refuse to live with the man.


    A wife shall not be entitled to get the maintenance when-

    1. She is living with some other person in adultery.
    2. Without any sufficient reason she refuses to live with the husband.
    3. They are living separately by mutual consent.


    If a maintenance order has been passed and the person fails to comply with such order and does not pay the maintenance then the Magistrate of first class may issue a warrant for the payment of the amount and may also sentence such person to an imprisonment for not exceeding one month.

    23 Oct 2023
    Question:-What is First Information Report? Discuss the evidentiary value. What is the effect of delay in lodging of FIR?

    The First Information Report is a report about the information related to the commission of a cognizable offence. this information is given by the informant to the police officer. FIR is only related to the cognizable offences. As per section 154 CrPC when an informant gives the information about the commission of cognizable offences to the police officer then the police officer has to reduce it into writing and get it signed by the informant. Then the copies of the first information report is to be given to the informant free of cost.
    As per section 154 if the police officer refuses to lodge the FIR the then the informant has the remedy to give the information to the Superintendent of Police and he in return may either conduct the investigation himself or may direct the police officer incharge to conduct the investigation.
    In the case of Lalita Kumari v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2013 SC) it was held that the information as to the cognizable offence I.e. FIR is the first step towards putting the criminal law into motion. Also it was held that it is mandatory for the police officer to lodge the FIR as it is the foundation stone for the delivery of justice.


    Evidentiary Value of First Information Report

    The FIR recorded by the police officer is not a substantive piece of evidence as it is not a statement given on oath. But it may be used for many other purposes like for corroboration or for contradiction.

    FIR may be used for the following purposes-
    • 1.Though the FIR is not a substantive piece of evidence, it helps in corroborating the facts and statements made by the informant and cross-examining him thereafte .
    • 2. As per Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act (1872), the FIR can be used as proof of the actions of the informant.
    • 3. As per Section 32(1) of the Indian Evidence Act (1872), if the informant dies and the statement recorded by the police in the FIR includes the reason for his death or about the events that might lead to his death, then it can act as substantial proof to validate the reasons for his death. This acts as a dying declaration, wherein the person testifies about the circumstances leading to his death.
    • 4. As per Section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act (1872), the FIR may be used to refute the informant’s testimony. This Section allows the contradiction of witnesses during the cross-examination.
    • 5. As per Section 157 of the Indian Evidence Act (1872), the FIR may be used in support of a witness but cannot be used to refute or undermine the testimony of other witnesses.

    Delay in lodging FIR

    When there is a delay in lodging FIR then it will not be a material irregularity rather the court shall be suspicious about conduct of the informant.
    But in incest cases or in rape cases there will be no such suspicion as in this the social stigma is involved and the delay in lodging FIR is explained. This was held in the case of State of Punjab v. Gurmeet Singh.

    21 Oct 2023
    Question:-what is the presumption related to the legitimacy of paternity in the Indian Evidence Act. Can such presumption be rebutted?

    the presumption related to legitimate paternity has been given under section 112 of the evidence act. Section 112 is in the nature of the presumption and that too the presumption of law. It is a principle of conclusive proof i.e. an irrebuttable presumption of law.
    As per section 112 the child shall be presumed to be the legitimate child of the man when the conditions of the section are fulfilled.

    Following are the conditions to be fulfilled for establishing the conclusive proof of legitimate paternity-


    1. Child born during the continuance of lawful marriage-

    the child whose paternity is in question must be born during the continuity of a valid marriage. The essential requirement for this is that the marriage must be a lawful valid marriage as per the conditions of section 5 of the Hindu marriage act.

    2. Child born after dissolution of marriage-

    a child born after the dissolution of marriage but within 280 days of such dissolution the he or she shall be presumed to be the legitimate child of the man. The essential condition for this that the woman did not remarry with another man before the birth of that child.

    3. Non access-

    the only defence that can be taken by the man in this presumption is that he has to prove the non-access towards the woman. Non access here means that the man has to prove that he did not have the opportunity to have a sexual relationship with the woman.

    Being a presumption of conclusive proof technically this presumption cannot be rebutted as it has been given under section 4 that the party does not have a right to disprove the conclusive proof. But as section 112 is a provision related to the interest of justice the larger societal interest lies in the fact that the conclusive proof must be allowed to be rebutted. But that must not be a general rebuttal rather such proof can be rebutted only by the most perfect and accurate piece of evidence.

    In the case of NandlalWasudevBadwaik v. LataNandlalBadwaik ( 2014 SC) it was held that the DNA test is considered to be the best evidence in cases dealing with legitimate paternity as this is a scientifically perfect test. Therefore in the interest of justice the conclusive proof in the section 112 shall stand rebutted but only by the DNA test report.

    20 Oct 2023
    Question:-Elaborate upon the jurisdiction of the civil courts under CPC.
    The jurisdiction of the civil court has been given under section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code. As per the legal jurisprudence section 9 is said to be the gateway to CPC. In the said section the conditions have been given which are imposed upon the jurisdiction of the civil court. Also section 9 contains the bars which restrict the civil court to take the cognizance upon a matter.

    As per section 9 the civil court can take cognizance upon the all suits of civil nature unless their cognizance is expressly barred under the Code or it is impliedly barred under any other statute or law.

    Therefore following are the key points of section 9-
    As per section 9 following points have to be kept in mind-


    1. Court shall have the jurisdiction- the usage of the word shall makes it a mandatory provision in which the court is bound to take cognizance on all the suits of civil nature. It is a concept of plenary jurisdiction which means that it shall be presumed that the court has the jurisdiction to try the suit. The burden shall now be upon the accused to prove that the court does not have the jurisdiction. (Abdul Gaffur v. State of Uttarakhand)

    2. Suit of civil nature- the words used in section 9 are suit of civil nature and not civil suit. Suit of civil nature is not a purely civil suit. In pure civil suit there is only one issue or there are more than one issue but all the issues are related to the civil legal rights of the individual. Whereas in suit of civil nature there are more than one issues but the difference is that there is one issue relating to the civil legal right of the person that is main issue. Also there are certain other subordinate issues which are related to the social or religious rights of the individual. Section 9 talks about the suit of civil nature and not pure civil suits. (Unichem Laboratories v. Rani Devi)

    3. Express bar- the court is restricted to take cognizance of the suit of civil nature unless their jurisdiction is expressly barred. Here expressly barred means that the jurisdiction of the civil court is restricted under the CPC itself in the forms of various bars. For example res judicata, res subjudice, Order II Rule, Order XXVIII Rule 1 etc.

    4. Implied bars- apart from the express bars there are certain other bars which are not expressly given under CPC but they are given in the other statutes and restrict the jurisdiction of the civil courts. In those statutes the specific tribunals have been constituted to deal with the specific subject matters and not the civil courts. For example rent tribunal under the rent control act, income tax tribunals, company law tribunals etc.

    In the case of Dulhabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh it was held that when the specific tribunal is not exercising the jurisdiction then the civil court shall have the jurisdiction to try the case. Also if the specific tribunal is not following the principles of natural justice then also the civil court shall have the jurisdiction.

    18 Oct 2023
    Question:-Examine the validity of the following agreement:
    A enters into an agreement with B that he will not carry on the business of medicine within his entire area mentioned. Is the agreement enforceable against B?
    The main question to be determined in this problem is that whether the agreement between A and B amounts to a reasonable restriction upon the trade and profession or not.
    The law point on this is under section 27 of the Indian Contract act. As per section 27 of the Indian contract act the agreements which are restricting the trade and profession are void agreements. These are those agreements which violate the right to trade and practicing profession of an individual which is a constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution of India.
    But at the same time section 27 has certain exceptions also. The proviso to section 27 states that if the restraint in the agreement upon the trade is reasonable i.e the person is restricted to practice trade or profession in a particular area limit or a reasonable area limits then such an agreement shall not be deemed to be in restraint of trade and profession.
    Applying the above law to the present fact it can be considered that the restraint in the agreement between A and B is not a reasonable restraint as per the proviso to section 27 as A is restraining B to carry on the business of medicine within the entire area and not within a limited area.
    This kind of restriction results in an unreasonable restriction on the trade and profession. Hence the agreement between A and B shall be a void agreement as per section 27 being in restrain of the trade and profession.
    17 Oct 2023
    Question:-Agreement is the gist of criminal conspiracy. Explain.
    Criminal conspiracy being an inchote offence and the policy being to prevent the larger crimes by punishing the accused at the very inception it does not require that the agreed act must be actually committed.
    The actus reus for the offence of criminal conspiracy is the very agreement. The “such an agreement is designated as criminal conspiracy”. Here the very agreement has been declared as criminal conspiracy and it is not required that the desired object must be attained.
    Being an inchoate offence it is not necessary that the act for which the agreement is entered into must be committed. It is sufficient if there is an agreement between the persons to commit an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means thhen it would be suffiecient to make those persons liable for the offence of criminal conspiracy.
    The illegal act as per section 43 may be in three forms I.e which is an offence, wheich is prohibited by law or which gives ground for civil action. Therefore the offence of conspiracy can be committed to commit any of the three forms of illegal act.

    Therefore there are three types of conspiracies-
    (a) to commit an offence
    (b) to commit an act prohibited by law
    (c ) to commit an act which gives ground for civil action.

    conspiracy to commit any offence mere agreement is sufficient whereas for conspiracy to do an act which is either prohibited by law or gives ground for civil action not only agreement but the act in pursuance of such agreement is required.
    Therefore the actus reus for section 120A depends upon the nature of conspiracy.
    16 Oct 2023
    Question:-‘A’ firm dealing with readymade garments advertised about clearance sale of their stock. ‘Z’ a customer visits shop, picks up a trouser from the lot with a price tag of Rs. 500, takes it to Salesman and asks him to pack it and prepare Bill. Salesman discovers that trousers in question should have been in the lot of articles with a price tag of 700 and refuses to sell the trouser telling that it was put in a lot of articles with price tag 500. Can Z customer compel A firm to sell the trouser at 500. Whether contract has been concluded?
    The law to be used in the present problem lies in the concept of invitation to proposal.
    An invitation to proposal is different from the proposal. In proposal the object is to obtain the acceptance. In invitation to proposal there is just an intention to obtain the proposal. A person who is making the invitation to proposal just gives the information about the proposal and the objective is to obtain the proposal in return. It is mere communication of the information in order to get the proposal. Unlike proposal, invitation to proposal is not defined under the Indian Contract Act.
    Invitation to proposal is not any one of the stage of the contract. The formation of contract starts from the proposal obtained after the invitation to proposal.
    In the case of Pharmaceuticals Society of Great Britain v. Boot cash chemist (1953) it was held that in cases when the goods are displayed on the shelves in a shop and the customer picks up a good and goes to the cash counter then the shopkeeper can refuse to give the goods. This is because the act of picking up the goods and going to the cash counter amounts to an offer and the cashier is then free to accept or reject the offer of the customer. Displaying the goods on the shelves amounts to invitation to offer and when after picking up the article the cashier denies then it does not amount to violation of a concluded contract.
    Applying the above law to the present facts it may be concluded that when A customer went to the cashier Z to purchase the garment then it amounts to an offer. Now Z is free to accept or to reject the offer made by A. This is because the displaying of the garments in the store amounts to invitation to proposal. Therefore when Z refused to sell the garment then it does not amount to breach of a concluded contract.
    14 Oct 2023
    Question:-(a) A is proclaimed as an offender by the State Government. He is arrested by a police officer without a warrant. A challenges his arrest in the High Court by filing a write of Habeas Corpus’ under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, on the ground that his arrest is illegal as he has been arrested without a warrant. Is his arrest illegal. Discuss.

    (b) A, an accused is arrested by a police officer without a warrant. After arrest, A is detained in the custody of police for 14 hours without the permission or order of a Magistrate. Is the detention of A for 14 hours without the order of the Magistrate, illegal? Give the relevant provision, if any, under the CrPC.
    (a) As per section 41 CrPC the police officer can arrest any person without the warrant to arrest obtained from the Magistrate. But as per the provisions of this section that person must be a proclaimed offendor as per section 82 of the CrPC or has been declared as a proclaimed offendor by the state government. In the present facts A has been declared as a proclaimed offendor by the state government. Therefore the police officer as per section 41 has the right to arrest his without the warrant. Hence the writ petition filed by A is not valid as his arrest is not illegal being without the warrant.

    (b) As per section 57 of the Criminal Procedure Code when any police officer arrests any person without the warrant then he may detain such person in custody for the reasonable time period only. Reasonable time means the time required for the initial interrogation of the arrested person. And such reasonable period must in no case be more than 24 hours. Within this period of 24 hours the arrested person must be produced before the Magistrate. In the present facts A is arrested without warrant and is detained for 14 hours. So this period of 14 hours is within the purview of section 57 I.e. within 24 hours. Therefore the arrest and detention is not illegal if after 14 hours of arrest he is produced before the Magistrate as per sction 57 CrPC.
    12 Oct 2023
    Question:-Explain the dictum “Actus Non-Facit Reum Nisi Mens Sit Rea”. What are the exceptions to this principle.
    A. As per the cardinal rule of criminal jurisprudence an act of any person shall amount to offence under the Indian Penal Code when there is an act combined with the state of mind. Actus non facit reum nisi men sit rea is the basic latin maxim around which the penal law revolves. The literal meaning of this is that to amount to an offence there must be actus reus and mens rea both coexisting. Actus reus means the act which is wrongful or punishable. Mens rea is the state of mind of a particular person who has committed such act. In order to amount to an offence there must be a wrongful act and there must also be the required mens rea along with it. But at the same time there are certain exceptions to this general rule. There are certain situations in which the act is punishable without the mens rea. There are certain offences which are punishable irrespective of the fact that they are committed without mens rea or guilty mind. This is known as the principle of strict liability. The strict liability means that even without mens rea the offence will be punishable. These are those offences which are affecting the society more as compared to the other offences and that is why the law is strict for them. These are those offences which have a grave impact on the society and in order to prevent the accused from escaping the liabilty on the basis of absence of mens rea. The offences which belong to the principle of strict liability like kidnapping punishable under section 363 IPC, public nuisance punishable under section 268 IPC and the socio economic offences which are made punishable under various other statutes. Kidnapping is an example of strict liability because kidnapping is an offence against the guardianship or the offence which may lead to exploitation of the kidnapped child and hence the accused cannot be allowed to escape the liability on the basis of absence of mens rea. Public nuisance is an offence of strict liability because it affects the health and interest of public at large. Also there are various offences which are mentioned in the various statutes and affects the socio economic condition of the nation such offences are also the offences of strict liability. In the case of State of Maharashtra v. M.H George it was held that the offence under FERA affects the socio economic condition of the nation and hence there is no requirement of proving the mend rea in such case as it is a principle of strict liability.
    11 Oct 2023
    Question:-Oral evidence cannot be substituted for the written evidence of any contract, which the parties have put into writing. Discuss and illustrate.
    A. The given phrase in the question is a manifestation of the rule of best evidence. The rule of best evidence means that it is the duty of the parties to give the best possible evidences in the case. Also it is the duty of the court to extract the best possible evidence from the parties when the court is not satisfies with the evidences given by the parties. This is one of the rule of best evidence that when any contract has been entered into in writing then the contents of such document has to be proved by documentary evidence only and oral evidence of it cannot be given. As per section 59 of the Indian Evidence Act it has been stated that oral evidence can be given for proving any fact except the contents of the document. For proving the terma of the document only documentary evidence can be given. The manifestation of this rule of best evidence can be clearly seen in section 91 and 92. As per section 91 of the Act when the terms of the contract, grant or other disposition are reduced into writing then to prove the terms of such document only documentary evidence can be given and oral evidence shall not be admissible. Also there may be c ertain contract grants or other disposition which are reduced into writing or not but they are required by law to be reduced into writing then to prove such transaction only documentary evidence can be given. These are those transaction for which it is mandatrory under law that they must be in writing for example rent agreement for more than 11 months, lease deed for an year or more, sale deed for a value above 100 rupees etc. So for proving the terms of these contracts only the documentary evidence can be given and oral evidence shall not be admissible. Also section 92 of the act is an extension of the rule of best evidence which is given under section 91 of the act. As per section 92 when the terms of any contract, grant or other disposition has been reduced into writing or are required by law to be in writing then for modifying, altering, adding or substracting any such term of any such transaction only documentary evidence can be given and oral evidence shall not be admissible. But in section 92 only six exceptional situations have been given in which it shall be allowed to give the oral evidence of the transactions. Hence, oral evidence cannot be given to prove the contents of the transactions which are duly documented and in such cases oral evidence shall not be admissible.