Indian Contract Act MCQ Quiz in मल्याळम - Objective Question with Answer for Indian Contract Act - സൗജന്യ PDF ഡൗൺലോഡ് ചെയ്യുക

Key Points

Correct Answer Explanation:
Section 185 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, states that "No consideration is necessary to create an agency." This means that an agency relationship can be established without any payment or consideration. This is a unique aspect of agency law, distinguishing it from most other contracts where consideration is a key element for validity.
Overview of Incorrect Options:
Section 4 of the Partnership Act, 1932: This section defines what a partnership is, detailing the relationship between persons who have agreed to share the profits of a business carried on by all or any of them acting for all. It does not deal with the concept of agency or the necessity of consideration in creating an agency.
Section 4 of the Indian Agency Act, 1950: This option is incorrect as there is no "Indian Agency Act, 1950". The Indian Contract Act of 1872 is the relevant legislation that deals with agency relationships in India, making this option invalid.
Section 2 of the Companies Act, 2013: This section provides definitions and interpretations for terms used within the Companies Act. It does not address agency relationships or the requirement of consideration for creating an agency, focusing instead on matters related to company law and corporate governance.

The correct answer is Option 4

Key PointsThe term "Contra Proferentem" is a legal doctrine applied in contract law. It stipulates that if there is any ambiguity in the terms of a contract, the ambiguity should be resolved against the party who drafted the contract or inserted the ambiguous term. This principle is particularly applied when one party has more power in drafting the contract, often seen in standard form contracts or 'boilerplate' contracts. The rationale behind this rule is to discourage the drafting party from including unclear or unfair terms, ensuring they make the terms as clear and equitable as possible.
Overview of Incorrect Options:
Option 1: Contradictory contract - This option is incorrect because a "contradictory contract" is not a recognized legal principle or term. While contracts can contain contradictions, this does not relate to the specific principle of resolving ambiguities against the drafter.
Option 2: Standard form contracts are to be interpreted legally - This statement is misleading and too broad. While it is true that all contracts, including standard form contracts, are to be interpreted according to legal principles, this does not specifically describe the Contra Proferentem rule, which deals with ambiguity in the contract terms.
Option 3: Limited construction - This is a vague term and does not accurately describe the Contra Proferentem rule. Limited construction might refer to a narrow interpretation of contract terms, but it does not specifically address the issue of resolving ambiguities against the drafter.
Option 4 (Correct): Ambiguity is to be resolved against the party who inserted limiting term - This accurately describes the Contra Proferentem rule, focusing on the resolution of ambiguities against the party who drafted or inserted the ambiguous term.

Hint

To match the items from List I with the correct sections from List II and provide a comprehensive explanation. The correct match, as stated, is option 2, which aligns the concepts with their respective sections of the law:

 A. Soundness of mind          ll. Sec 12

Soundness of mind is crucial for the validity of a contract, ensuring that parties can understand the terms and make a judicious decision. Section 12 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, specifies what constitutes soundness of mind for the purposes of contracting. 

 B. Fraud                      lV. Sec 17

Fraud involves deliberate deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain. Section 17 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, defines fraud as acts committed with intent to deceive another party or to induce him to enter into a contract. 

 C. Free consent               I. Sec 14

Free consent is essential for a contract to be binding. Section 14 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, outlines that consent must be given freely and not be coerced, obtained under undue influence, fraud, misrepresentation, or mistake. 

 D. Competency to contract     lll. Sec 11

Competency to contract refers to the legal ability of a party to enter into a contract. Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, states that a person must be of legal age, sound mind, and not disqualified from contracting by any law to which they are subject. 

This matching and explanations demonstrate the fundamental legal concepts essential for the formation of a valid contract under the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Each section mentioned provides a legal framework that ensures contracts are made by parties who are competent, have a clear understanding of their actions, and agree to the terms without being subjected to deceitful practices

Key Points

To convert a proposal into a promise, the acceptance of the proposal must meet certain conditions. Let's analyze each statement provided in the question:

Statement A: Absolute 

Acceptance must be absolute, meaning it should be without any conditions or modifications to the original proposal. This ensures that both parties are in agreement on the same terms. 

Hence, Statement A is correct.

Statement B: Unqualified

Unqualified acceptance implies that the acceptance is given without any reservations. It aligns with the concept of absolute acceptance, reinforcing the notion that the acceptance should not introduce new conditions or alter the terms of the proposal.

Hence, Statement B is correct.

Statement C: Conditional

Conditional acceptance, on the other hand, means that the acceptance is subject to certain terms or conditions not present in the original proposal. This does not result in a promise as per the original proposal but leads to a counteroffer. 

Hence, Statement C is incorrect.

Statement D: Random

Random acceptance does not make sense in the context of legal agreements or promises. Acceptance must be deliberate and clear to both parties involved, ensuring that there is mutual understanding and agreement.

Hence, Statement D is incorrect.

Statement E: Expressed in some usual and reasonable manner

Acceptance must be communicated in a manner that is considered usual and reasonable under the circumstances. This means the acceptance should be conveyed in a way that is understandable and customary for the type of agreement being made, ensuring clarity and reducing the chances of misunderstandings.

Hence, Statement E is correct.

 Option 3 (A, B, and E only) is the correct answer as it includes Absolute, Unqualified, and the necessity for acceptance to be Expressed in some usual and reasonable manner. These conditions ensure a clear and mutual agreement between the parties involved.

Hint

Pledge:
A pledge is a special kind of bailment where goods are delivered as security for the payment of a debt or performance of a promise.
It involves the physical transfer of an asset, but not the transfer of ownership.
The person who pledges the goods (the pledgor) transfers them to the pledgee, but with the condition that the goods will be returned upon the fulfillment of the obligation.
Example: Pawnbroking, where goods are pledged in exchange for a loan.
In summary, a pledge specifically refers to the bailment of goods as security for payment of a debt or performance of a promise, which is why it is the correct term in this scenario. The other options, though related to financial and legal agreements, do not accurately describe the bailment of goods as security.

Key Points

Correct Answer Explanation:
General Lien is NOT one of the modes of termination of an agency. A lien is a right to retain possession of property belonging to another person until a debt owed by that person is discharged. A general lien is a right to retain any property—regardless of its connection to the debt—owned by the debtor. However, in the context of agency, termination pertains to the cessation of the agent's authority to act on behalf of the principal, which is unrelated to the concept of a lien.
According to Section 201 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872- 

Termination of agency: An agency is terminated

1. by the principal revoking his authority; or
2. by the agent renouncing the business of the agency; or
3. by the business of the agency being completed; or
4. by either the principal or agent dying or becoming of unsound mind; or
5. by the principal being adjudicated an insolvent under the provisions of any Act for the time being in force for the relief of insolvent debtors

The correct answer is Option 1

Key Points

Correct Answer Explanation:
When goods are ascertained: The property in unascertained goods passes to the buyer when the goods become ascertained or are identified in accordance with the agreement after the contract of sale is made. This is because, for the transfer of property in goods to occur, the goods must be clearly identified and agreed upon by both the buyer and the seller.

Key Points

• Fisher V Bell is a landmark case that established the legal principle regarding the display of goods for sale. The case clarified that displaying an item with a price tag in a shop window is not an offer to sell but an invitation to treat. An invitation to treat is a legal term indicating that a person is willing to negotiate but not yet prepared to make a binding contract. Hence, (a) matches with (iii).
• Harvey V Facey is a case that highlighted the principle regarding the communication of an offer in contract law. It established that a mere response to a request for information (in this case, a price quote) is not an offer that can be accepted to form a binding contract. This case is about the quotation of prices, which means (b) matches with (iv).
• Mohiri Bibi V Dharmodas Ghosh is a significant case in the context of minor's contracts. It established the principle that a contract with a minor is void from the beginning. Therefore, it directly relates to the statement that a minor's contract is void, making (c) match with (ii).
• Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd V Selfridge & Co. Ltd is a foundational case in the law of contracts that established the doctrine of privity of contract. This doctrine states that a contract cannot confer rights or impose obligations arising under it on any person except the parties to it. Therefore, (d) matches with (i).

Solution in Bullet Form: -

Fisher V Bell: - Established the principle of invitation to treat. - Display of goods with a price is not an offer but an invitation to negotiate.

Harvey V Facey: - Highlighted the principle related to the communication of an offer. - A response to a request for information (price quote) is not an offer.

Mohiri Bibi V Dharmodas Ghosh: - Established that a contract with a minor is void from the beginning. - Significantly impacts the enforceability of contracts involving minors.

Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co. Ltd V Selfridge & Co. Ltd: - Established the doctrine of privity of contract. - Only parties to a contract can sue or be sued on it. This matching shows the relevance of specific landmark cases to fundamental principles of contract law, illustrating how these cases have shaped legal doctrines and practices.

Key Points 

The Indian Contract Act of 1872 is a pivotal piece of legislation that serves as the foundation for contracts in India. It delineates the essential elements required for a legally binding agreement between parties. One of the core concepts within this act is how a proposal (or offer) and its subsequent acceptance lead to the formation of a contract.

Proposal or Offer:
Under Section 2(a) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a "proposal" is when a person signifies to another their willingness to do or abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that other to such act or abstinence. In simpler terms, a proposal is an expression of willingness by one party (the proposer) to enter into an agreement under specific terms, intended to be binding as soon as it is accepted by the person to whom it's made.

Acceptance of Proposal:
Following the proposal stage, the Act outlines the process of acceptance in Section 2(b), which states, "When the person to whom the proposal is made signifies his assent thereto, the proposal is said to be accepted. A proposal, when accepted, becomes a promise."

For acceptance to be valid and thereby form a promise that leads to an enforceable contract, it must meet certain criteria:

Unconditional and Absolute: The acceptance must be unconditional and correspond exactly to the terms of the offer. Any variation or condition leads to a counter-offer, not an acceptance.

Communication: Acceptance must be communicated to the proposer. According to Section 3, the communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made. Similarly, the acceptance of an offer is complete as against the proposer when it is put in a mode of transmission to him, so as to be out of the power of the acceptor; and as against the acceptor, when it comes to the knowledge of the proposer.

Proper Mode of Acceptance: If the proposer prescribes a specific mode of acceptance, it should ideally be followed. However, if the acceptance is transmitted in some other mode but reaches the proposer, it may still be valid, provided it is not explicitly rejected and the proposer does not insist on the specified mode.

Within Time Frame: If the proposal specifies a time for acceptance, it must be accepted within that time frame. Otherwise, it should be accepted within a reasonable time, considering the circumstances of the proposal.

When these conditions are met, and the proposer’s offer is accepted, a promise is formed. This promise forms the basis of a contract when supported by other essential elements like consideration (something of value exchanged), the capacity of parties (legal ability to enter into a contract), lawful object, and not expressly declared to be void.

Conclusion:
Thus, in the framework of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the transition from a proposal to a promise through acceptance is a fundamental process in the formation of a contract. This mechanism ensures that both parties have a mutual understanding and agreement on the terms, which is crucial for the enforceability of the contract under law.

Key Points

Correct Answer: Krell vs Henry
Explanation: This case is a landmark decision in English contract law regarding the frustration of purpose. It involves a situation where an event (the coronation of King Edward VII) was cancelled, and the rented rooms intended to view this event became pointless. The court held that the contract was frustrated because the foundation of the contract (viewing the coronation procession) was destroyed, making the contract's purpose impossible to fulfill.
Key Takeaway:
The case of Krell vs Henry is directly associated with the concept of frustration of purpose, where the underlying event that the contract was based upon did not occur, making the performance of the contract devoid of its original intent or purpose. The other options, while related to contract law and the doctrine of frustration in some aspects, do not specifically address the conditions laid out in the provided statement.