Multiple Choice QuestionsAssume that the Governor also made a second order requiring the release of all persons under the age of 25 and over the age of 65 who were serving a sentence of less than one year’s imprisonment. Under the Rules, this order is:
Directly discriminatory
Indirectly discriminatory
Not discriminatory
Not discriminatory
A.
Directly discriminatory
Followed by Rule A
Assume further that the government made a third order, releasing all graduate prisoners who are serving a sentence of less than one year’s imprisonment. Which of the following statistics would have to be true for this order to be indirectly discriminatory?
Only 13% of the prison population in Bihar have a graduation degree
Of the graduate prisoners, 89% belong to upper castes.
Only 25% women in Bihar get a graduation degree.
Only 25% women in Bihar get a graduation degree.
Rule E: ‘A discriminatory act shall be justified if its effect is to promote the well-being of disadvantaged groups, such as women, dalits, religious minorities, sexual minorities or disabled persons’.
Would you first Order of release of all women prisoners be justified under Rule E?
Yes, because it promotes the well-being of women.
No, because it does not promote the well-being of women prisoners
No, because it does not promote the well-being of all disadvantaged groups equally.
No, because it does not promote the well-being of all disadvantaged groups equally.
(For Questions 14 to 18)
Rules:
A. A minor is a person who is below the age of eighteen. However, where a guardian administers the minor’s property the age of majority is twenty one.
B. A minor is not permitted by law to enter into a contract. Hence, where a minor enters into a contract with a major person, the contract is not enforceable. This effectively means that neither the minor nor the other party can make any claim on the basis of the contract.
C. In a contract with a minor, if the other party hands over any money or confers any other benefit on the minor, the same shall not be recoverable from the minor unless the other party was deceived by the minor to hand over money or any other benefit. The other party will have to show that the minor misrepresented her age, he was ignorant about the age of the minor and that he handed over the benefit on the basis of such representation.
Facts
Ajay convinces Bandita, a girl aged 18 that she would sell her land to him. Bandita’s mother Chaaru is her guardian. Nonetheless Bandita, without the permission of Chaaru, sells the land to Ajay for a total sum of rupees fifty lakh, paid in full and final settlement of the price. Chaaru challenges this transaction claiming the Bandita is a minor and hence the possession of the land shall not be given to Ajay. Thus Ajay is in a difficult situation and has no idea how to recover his money from Bandita.
Chaaru is justified in challenging the sale transaction because:
Bandita is of unsound mind and is not in a position to make rational decisions.
Though Bandita is eighteen year old, she will be treated as a minor, as Chaaru is her guardian.
Though Bandita is eighteen year old, she cannot sell the land without the permission of her mother.
Though Bandita is eighteen year old, she cannot sell the land without the permission of her mother.
Ajay can be allowed to recover the money only if he can show that:
He was deceived by Bandita who misrepresented her age.
He honestly believed that Bandita was empowered under the law to sell the land.
He was an honest person who had paid the full price of the land to Bandita.
He was an honest person who had paid the full price of the land to Bandita.
In order to defend the sale, Bandita will need to show that
Bandita has attained the age of majority.
Bandita is mature enough to make rational decisions regarding her own affairs.
The sale transaction was beneficial to her interest and will enhance her financial status.
The sale transaction was beneficial to her interest and will enhance her financial status.
Which of the following is correct?
Ajay should be allowed to recover the money because even though there is no contract, Bandita and Chaaru should not be allowed to unjustly benefit from Ajay’s money.
Ajay should be allowed the possession of the land because Chaaru can always decide to approve the transaction between Ajay and Bandita.
Ajay should not be allowed to recover because he induced Bandita, a minor, to sell the land.
Ajay should not be allowed to recover because he induced Bandita, a minor, to sell the land.
Which of the following is correct?
If Ajay is allowed to recover the money, that will defeat the law framed for protecting the minors against fraudulent persons.
If Ajay is not allowed to recover that will cause him injustice as he has not paid off the entire sale price.
If Ajay is allowed to recover, Chaaru will benefit from both the money and the land.
If Ajay is allowed to recover, Chaaru will benefit from both the money and the land.
(For Questions 19 to 22)
Rules
A. The act of using threats to force another person to enter into a contract is called coercion.
B. The act of using influence on another and taking undue advantage of that person is called undue influence.
C. In order to prove coercion, the existence of the use of threat, in any form and manner, is necessary. If coercion is proved, the person who has been so threatened can refuse to abide by the contract.
D. In order to prove undue-influence, there has to be a pre-existing relationship between the parties to a contract. The relationship has to be of such a nature that one is in a position to influence the other. If it is proven that there has been undue influence, the party who has been so influenced need not enforce the contract or perform his obligations under the contract.
Facts
Aadil and Baalu are best friends. Aadil is the son of multi millionaire business person, Chulbul who owns Maakhan Pharmaceuticals. Baalu is the son of a bank employee, Dhanraj. One day, Aadil is abducted from his office by Baalu. Chulbul receives a phone call from Dhanraj telling him that if he does not make Baalu the CEO of Maakhan Pharmaceuticals, Aadil will be killed. Chulbul reluctantly agrees to make the Baalu the CEO.
Subsequently, Chulbul and Baalu sign an employment contract. However as soon as Aadil is released and safely returns home, Chulbul tells Baalu that he shall not enforce the employment contract. Baalu and Dhanraj are not sure as to what is to be done next.
As per the rules and the given facts, who coerces whom:
Aadil coerces Baalu
Baalu coerces Chulbul
Dhanraj coerces Chulbul
Dhanraj coerces Chulbul
In the above fact situation:
There is undue influence exercised by Dhanraj on Baalu.
There is undue influence exercised by Aadil on Chulbul
There is no undue influence
There is no undue influence
Switch
