1.Can compensation be awarded in a suit under section 21 of the Specific Relief Act for specific performance of a contract, if the plaintiff has failed to claim it in the plaint ?
a.No.
b.Yes.
c.Yes. At the discretion of court
d.Yes. If orally requested at the time of evidence.
Ans.a
Sol.
- Section 21 of the Specific Relief Act mentions the power of the court to award compensation in certain cases. Such cases are:
- (i)Claiming compensation in addition to specific relief [Section 21(1)]
- (ii)Awarding compensation in substitution of specific relief [Section 21(2)]
- (iii)Awarding compensation in addition to specific relief [Section 21(2)]
- (iv)Assessment of compensation according to Section 73 of the Contract Act
- (v)No compensation unless claimed [Section 21(5)]
- It is important to note that the plaintiff must claim compensation also or in substitution
for specific relief. However, where he fails to do so no compensation may be granted. - Amendment of the plaint [Proviso to Section 21(5)]: where the plaintiff has not claimed any such compensation in the plaint, the court shall, at any stage of the proceeding, allow him to amend the plaint on such terms as may be just, for including a claim for such compensation
2.Which of the following statement is untrue?
a.An agency is terminated by the principal revoking his authority
b.An agency is terminated by the agent renouncing the business of the agency
c.An agency is terminated by either the principal or agent dying or becoming unsound mind.
d.An agency is terminated when the principal is convicted for an offence.
Ans.d
Sol.
- Termination of agency simply means putting an end to the relationship of principal and agent.
- Modes of Termination of Agency [Section 201 of Indian Contract Act]: An agency is terminated by the principal revoking his authority; or by the agent renouncing the business of the agency; or by the business of the agency being completed; or by either the principal or agent dying or becoming of unsound mind; or 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.
3.In Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 “instrument” is defined as –
a.non-testamentary instrument.
b.both testamentary and non-testamentary instruments.
c.testamentary instruments.
d.instruments effecting sale, mortgage, lease and gift alone
Ans.a
Sol.
- Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act defines ”instrument” as a non–testamentary instrument.
- This clearly means that the term ”instrument” as used in this Act excludes testamentary document (i.e. a document of will). Transfer of property under testamentary instrument or will takes place only after the death of the testator (one who makes the Will). Transfer of Property Act is applicable only to transfers taking place between living persons i.e. where transferor and transferee both are alive on the date of the transfer. It excludes transfer under wills. Accordingly, the term ”instrument” as used in this Act shall mean only that document which transfers a property between the living persons.
4.Which one of the following is not a presumption as to a negotiable instrument under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881?
a.Every negotiable instrument bearing a date was made or drawn on such date.
b.Every bill of exchange was accepted within a reasonable time after its date and before its maturity.
c.both the indorsee and indorsor are discharged from the liability.
d.A lost promissory note, bill of exchange or cheque was not duly stamped.
Ans.d
Sol.
- Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act provides for the following presumptions to facilitate proof of claims arising upon them.
- Presumption as to consideration—Every negotiable instrument is presumed to have been made or drawn for consideration
- Presumption as to date—Every instrument is presumed to have been drawn or made on the date that appears on it
- Time of acceptance—When a bill of exchange has been accepted, it is presumed that it was accepted within reasonable time after its date and before its maturity.
- Time of transfer—Every transfer of a negotiable instrument is presumed to have been made before its maturity.
- Order of indorsements—The indorsements on a negotiable instrument are presumed to have been made in the order in which they appear on the instrument.
- As to stamp—Where an instrument has been lost, it is presumed that the instrument was duly stamped.
- Holder in due course—Every holder is presumed to be a holder in due course.
- Proof of protest [S. 119]—In a suit upon an instrument which has been dishonoured, the court shall, on proof of the protest, presume the fact of dishonour, unless and until such fact is disproved.
5.Who has not functioned as Attorney General of India ?
a.Mukul Rohatgi.
b.Tushar Mehta.
c.K.K. Venugopal.
d.G. E. Vanavahati.
Ans.b
Sol.
- Tushar Mehta has not served as the Attorney General of India. He currently holds the position of Solicitor General of India, which is the second-highest law officer in the country after the Attorney General.
- Article 76 of the constitution mentions that the Attorney General is the highest law officer of India. As a chief legal advisor to the government of India, he advises the union government on all legal matters.
- Solicitor General of India is regarded as the second highest law officer position, the first being
the position of the Attorney General. Mr. Tushar Mehta is the current Solicitor General of India reappointed
w.e.f. 01.07.2023 for a period of three years i.e. till 30.06.2026 or until further orders whichever is earlier.
