Subject

Legal Aptitude

Class

CLAT Class 12

Test Series

Take Zigya Full and Sectional Test Series. Time it out for real assessment and get your results instantly.

Test Yourself

Practice and master your preparation for a specific topic or chapter. Check you scores at the end of the test.

 Multiple Choice QuestionsMultiple Choice Questions

1.

Principle: Under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, an employer is liable to pay compensation to his workmen for injuries sustained by them by an accident arising out of and in the course of employment.

Facts: M, the Manager of SRK Industries asked his secretary S to submit a report at the Government Labour Office. ‘S’ submitted the report as directed. On his way back S met one of his class mates. He then decided to have a cup of tea together on a way side restaurant. Sometime later, ‘S’ got a message from his office to report back as it was long time since he left the office. ‘S’ rushed back on his Motor Cycle. On his way back a Truck which was coming from a side road hit ‘S’. He was admitted in a nearby hospital with multiple injuries. He claims compensation under the Employees Compensation Act from his employer.

  •  The Employer is not liable as the truck driver was negligent.

  •  The Employer is liable as S had to rush back to the office, because of the message from the office.

  •  The Employer is liable to pay compensation as the accident took place arising out of and in the course of employment.

     

  • The Employer is not liable as he was admitted in a private hospital and not a Government Hospital.


C.

 The Employer is liable to pay compensation as the accident took place arising out of and in the course of employment.

 

87 Views

2.

. Principle: In criminal law, misappropriation is the intentional, illegal use of the property or funds of another person for one's own use or other unauthorized purpose, particularly by a public official, a trustee of a trust, an executor or administrator of a dead person's estate or by any person with a responsibility to care for and protect another's assets. Embezzlement is misappropriation when the funds involved have been lawfully entrusted to the embezzler. On the contrary, theft is the illegal taking of another person's property or services without that person's permission or consent with the intent to deprive the rightful owner of it.

Facts: A went for swimming at the Municipal Swimming Pool. A handed over all his valuables, including some cash to X, the guard on duty for safe custody, as notified by the Municipality. After swimming for an hour, A came out and searched for X. He found another guard on duty and that guard informed A that X had gone home after completing his shift and did not hand over anything to be given to A. A registered a complaint with the police. X was traced but he told the police that he sold all the valuables and the entire cash was used for drinking liquor. What offence, if any, was/were committed by X?

  •  X is not guilty of criminal misappropriation as he did not make any personal gain out of those items with him.

  •  X is liable for criminal misappropriation and embezzlement.

  •  X is liable for theft as he took A’s property without X’s permission.

  •  If at all X is liable, it is for criminal misappropriation only.


B.

 X is liable for criminal misappropriation and embezzlement.

80 Views

3.

Principle: Contract is a written or spoken agreement, with specific terms between two or more persons or entities in which there is a promise to do something in return for a valuable benefit known as consideration. Such an agreement is intended to be enforceable by law. A unilateral contract is one in which there is a promise to pay or give other consideration in return for actual performance.

Facts: A Toilet Soap Manufacturing Company in India in order to promote the sale of their product, published an advertisement in all the Newspapers on January 1, 2017 that the Company has kept a model ignition key of an Audi A3 Car. The advertisement also stated that whoever gets the said key before December 31, 2017 from a soap bar will be gifted with the Audi A3 Car. Mr. Martin, a foreigner who came to India as a Tourist who was staying in a Hotel found a Key similar to same Car Ignition Key. Mr. Martin brought this matter to the notice of the Hotel Manager. The Manager informed Mr. Martin about the Company’s advertisement on January 1, 2017. Mr. Martin wants to claim the Car. Will he succeed?

  •  No. The Soap Company has not entered into a contract with Mr. Martin as he was not in India on January 1, 2017 when the advertisement was published.

  •  No. Actual intention of the Company was to promote the sale of the Soap.

  •  The Hotel Manager who could legally claim the Car as he was the one actually purchased the soap for the use in the Hotel.

  •  Mr. Martin obtained the Key before the stipulated date from the Soap Bar. So he is covered by the offer of the Soap Company and can claim the car.


D.

 Mr. Martin obtained the Key before the stipulated date from the Soap Bar. So he is covered by the offer of the Soap Company and can claim the car.

104 Views

4.

 Principle: Ownership in property consists of right to possess, right to use, right to alienate and right to exclude others. Sale is complete when property gets transferred Aglasem Admission from the seller to the buyer on sale.

Facts: ‘A’ sold his car to ‘B’. After this, ‘B’ requested ‘A’ to keep the car in his care on behalf ‘B’ for one month. ‘A’ agreed.

 

  •  Sale of car is not complete

  •  Sale will be completed when ‘B’ will take the delivery of the car.

  •  Sale of car is complete.

  •  Sale will be automatically completed after the expiry of one month


C.

 Sale of car is complete.

106 Views

5.

 Principle: If a party to a contract agrees to it under undue influence of any other party then the party under the undue influence may refuse to perform in accordance with the agreement.

Facts: A, a rich youngster became a member of a religious group and soon he was appointed by P the head of the group as his personal secretary. As per the rules of the group, all officials and staff of the group were supposed to stay in the group’s official premises itself. Some days later, A was asked by P to execute a Gift deed in favour of P, in which it was mentioned that all immovable properties in his name are being gifted to P. A was unwilling to execute the deed, but he was forcefully restrained by P and his body guards in P’s office and made A sign the gift deed. Soon after this A left the group and refused to hand over the property as agreed to in the gift deed. Is A’s action valid?

  •  A executed the deed, under compulsion and undue influence, and was right in withdrawing from the contract

  •  A executed the deed, under compulsion and undue influence, and was right in withdrawing from the contract.

  •  As the gift deed was executed by A, he cannot refuse.

  •  As Gift is also a contract, the consent of A was not obtained by P while executing the deed.


A.

 A executed the deed, under compulsion and undue influence, and was right in withdrawing from the contract

76 Views

6.

 Principle: Every agreement, by which any party is restricted absolutely from enforcing his right in respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary Tribunals, is void to that extent. The law also provides that nobody can confer jurisdiction to a civil court by an agreement between parties.

Facts: A and B entered into a valid contract for rendering certain service. A clause in the contract was that in case of any dispute arose out of the contract; it shall be referred to for Arbitration only. Is the contract valid?

  •  Arbitration is also a valid dispute settlement machinery recognized by law and hence the entire contract is valid.

  •  The parties were trying to confer jurisdiction to some authority to decide a dispute and hence the clause would be invalid.

  •  Arbitrator cannot be termed as an ordinary Tribunal. Hence, the agreement is void and would be unenforceable.

  •  The contract is valid but the clause regarding Arbitration is void.


A.

 Arbitration is also a valid dispute settlement machinery recognized by law and hence the entire contract is valid.

85 Views

7.

 Principle: The concept of natural justice is against bias and for the right to a fair hearing. While the term natural justice is often retained as a general concept, and it has largely been replaced and extended by the general ‘duty to act fairly’.

Fact: ‘X’, a male employee of a company was dismissed by the employer just on the basis of a complaint by ‘Y’, a female employee of the company that ‘X’ was trying to be too friendly with her and often requested her to accompany him to the canteen.

Is the dismissal of ‘X' valid ?

  •  No, because in the modern times this type of behaviour is common

  •  No, because the employer did not give a chance to ‘X’ to explain his side, thereby violated the principles of natural justice.

  •  Yes, moral law is antique and therefore, not applicable in modern times, therefore the termination is valid and no violations of the principles of natural justice occurred

  •  Yes, because men are not supposed to behave improperly with women and hence there is no violation of any principles of law


B.

 No, because the employer did not give a chance to ‘X’ to explain his side, thereby violated the principles of natural justice.

306 Views

8.

 Principle: Penal laws provide that whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man or woman, shall be punished for rape.

Facts: A Police Officer found a man engaged in carnal intercourse with an animal. The Police Officer arrested the man and produced him before the Court

  •  Court will punish the police officer.

     

  •  Court will not punish the man for rape.

  •  Court will punish the man for rape.

  •  Court will not punish the police officer.


B.

 Court will not punish the man for rape.

135 Views

9.

 Principle: When a person who has made a promise to another person to do something does not fulfill his promise, the other person becomes entitled to receive, from the person who did not fulfill his promise, compensation in the form of money.

Facts: ‘X’ made a promise to ‘Y’ to repair his car engine. ‘Y’ made the payment for repair. After the repair, ‘Y’ went for a drive in the same car. While driving the car, ‘Y’ met with an accident due to bursting of a tyre.

  • ‘Y’ will be entitled to receive compensation from ‘X’ in the form of money Aglasem Admission

  •  ‘X’ will not be entitled to receive compensation.

  •  ‘X’ will be entitled to receive compensation from ‘Y’ in the form of money.

  •  ‘Y’ will not be entitled to receive compensation from ‘X’.


D.

 ‘Y’ will not be entitled to receive compensation from ‘X’.

85 Views

10.

 Principle: It is a case of fraud where a party to a contract knows or believes a fact to be true, but conceals it actively from the other party with a view to induce that person to enter into the contract.

Facts: While taking a life insurance policy, in reply to questions by the insurance company during the inquiry into his proposal, Zameer deliberately concealed the fact of his medical treatment for a serious ailment, which he had undergone only a few weeks ago.

  •  The act of Zameer did not amount to fraud, as disclosing the fact would have Aglasem Admission resulted in exposure of his privacy.

  •  The act of Zameer amounted to innocent misrepresentation

  •  The act of Zameer did not amount to any misrepresentation.

  •  The concealment of fact by Zameer amounted to fraud.


D.

 The concealment of fact by Zameer amounted to fraud.

79 Views