Question 1

Describe the protection in respect of conviction for an offence as provided in Constitution. Compare the same with the analogous provisions in Criminal Law.

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: The Indian Constitution, primarily through Article 20, provides fundamental protections against arbitrary punishment for offences. These safeguards include: (a) Ex-post facto laws (Article 20(1)): No person shall be convicted of any offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence. (b) Double Jeopardy (Article 20(2)): No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once. (c) Self-incrimination (Article 20(3)): No person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. Criminal Law (e.g., CrPC, IPC, Evidence Act) operationalizes these constitutional principles. For instance, the CrPC ensures fair investigation and trial, the Evidence Act protects against forced confessions, and the IPC defines offences prospectively. While the Constitution provides the overarching rights, criminal statutes lay down the procedural and substantive framework for their enforcement, ensuring due process and protection against unfair conviction. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Constitution of India: Article 20 (Clauses 1, 2, 3). - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC): Sections related to investigation, trial, and evidence (e.g., Sections 161, 164, 300). - Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): Defines offences and punishments, applied prospectively. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962): While primarily on sedition, it reinforces the principle of prospective application of criminal law. - M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra (1954): Landmark case on the scope of self-incrimination under Article 20(3). - Kalawati v. State of H.P. (1953): Clarified the 'prosecuted and punished' aspect of double jeopardy under Article 20(2). 4. Clear Conclusion: Article 20 of the Constitution ens

Question 2

Describe prohibition of discrimination based on sex. Explain meaning, scope and extent of term "citizen" within the purview of Constitution of India.

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: (a) Prohibition of Discrimination based on Sex: The Indian Constitution guarantees equality and prohibits discrimination. Article 15(1) explicitly states that the State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them. Article 15(2) extends this prohibition to access public places. Importantly, Article 15(3) allows the State to make special provisions for women and children, recognizing historical disadvantages and promoting substantive equality. Article 16(2) prohibits discrimination on grounds of sex in matters of public employment. (b) Meaning, Scope, and Extent of "Citizen": The term "citizen" in the Constitution refers to individuals who enjoy full civil and political rights in India. Part II of the Constitution (Articles 5-11) deals with citizenship. It does not define 'citizen' but rather specifies who became a citizen at the commencement of the Constitution (Articles 5-8) and empowers Parliament to regulate citizenship by law (Article 11). The Citizenship Act, 1955, subsequently enacted, provides for acquisition and termination of citizenship. The scope extends to fundamental rights available only to citizens (e.g., Articles 15, 16, 19) and political rights (e.g., right to vote, hold public office). 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Constitution of India: Articles 15, 16, 5-11. - Citizenship Act, 1955. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - C.B. Muthamma v. Union of India (1979): Struck down discriminatory service rules based on sex in public employment. - Air India v. Nargesh Meerza (1981): Held certain service conditions for air hostesses as discriminatory on grounds of sex. - Pradeep Jain v. Union of India (1984): Discussed the concept of Indian citizenship and its implications for rights. 4. Clear Conclusion: The Constitution firmly prohibits sex-based discrimination, while allowing affirmative action for women, and defines citizenship through specific provi

Question 3

When an order for injunction may be discharged, varied or set aside? What are the consequences of disobedience or breach of injunctioin?

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: An order for injunction, though a powerful remedy, is not immutable. Under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), it may be discharged, varied, or set aside by the court that granted it, or by a superior court. This typically occurs if: (a) There is a material change in circumstances since the injunction was granted. (b) The injunction was obtained by misrepresentation or suppression of material facts. (c) The injunction causes undue hardship to the party against whom it was granted, and the balance of convenience shifts. (d) The order was passed without jurisdiction or is otherwise legally unsustainable. Consequences of Disobedience or Breach: Disobedience or breach of an injunction order constitutes contempt of court. The court has powers to enforce its orders and punish non-compliance. The consequences can be severe: (a) Attachment of the property of the person guilty of disobedience. (b) Detention of such person in civil prison. (c) In some cases, the court may even direct the police to ensure compliance. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Civil Procedure Code, 1908: Order 39 Rule 4 (for discharge/variation/setting aside), Order 39 Rule 2A (for consequences of disobedience). - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath (1994): Emphasized that an order obtained by fraud or suppression of material facts can be set aside. - Anil Kumar Singh v. Vijay Pal Singh (2000): Discussed the powers of the court under Order 39 Rule 2A for breach of injunction. 4. Clear Conclusion: Injunctions are subject to modification or revocation based on changed circumstances or procedural impropriety, reflecting the court's inherent power to do justice. However, once in force, their breach is a serious matter, attracting stringent penalties to uphold the sanctity and authority of judicial orders.

Question 4

Explain the meaning, nature, scope and modes of setting up counter claim. Who may file counter claim and upto which stage a counter claim may be set up ? Discuss the effect of counter claim.

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: (a) Meaning: A counter-claim is a claim made by a defendant against the plaintiff in the same suit. It is essentially a cross-action, allowing the defendant to seek relief against the plaintiff, rather than merely defending the plaintiff's claim. (b) Nature: It is treated as a separate suit by the defendant against the plaintiff, enabling the court to adjudicate all disputes between the parties in a single proceeding, thereby avoiding multiplicity of suits. (c) Scope: It can be any right or claim in respect of a cause of action accruing to the defendant against the plaintiff, either before or after the filing of the suit, but before the defendant has delivered his defence or before the time fixed for delivering his defence has expired. (d) Modes of Setting Up: A counter-claim is set up by including it in the written statement filed by the defendant. (e) Who may file: Any defendant against the plaintiff. (f) Upto which stage: It can be set up at any time before the defendant has delivered his defence or before the time fixed for delivering his defence has expired. The court may, in exceptional circumstances, allow it later. (g) Effect: If a counter-claim is established, the court can pronounce a final judgment in the same suit, both on the original claim and the counter-claim. It has the same effect as a cross-suit, and the court can grant a decree for any balance found due to either party. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Civil Procedure Code, 1908: Order 8 Rules 6A to 6G. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - Laxmidas Dahyabhai Kabarwala v. Nanabhai Chunilal Kabarwala (1964): Established that a counter-claim is virtually a cross-suit and should be treated as such. - Gurbachan Singh v. Bhag Singh (1996): Clarified the stage at which a counter-claim can be filed, emphasizing the 'before filing written statement' rule. 4. Clear Conclusion: Counter-claims are a procedural mechanism under the CPC that allow defendants to assert their claims

Question 5

Explain the doctrine of "feeding the grant by estoppels"?

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: The doctrine of "feeding the grant by estoppel" is an equitable principle enshrined in Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. It applies when a person (transferor) purports to transfer immovable property to another (transferee) for consideration, representing that they have the authority to transfer it, but at the time of transfer, they do not possess the full title or interest in that property. If the transferor subsequently acquires any interest or title in that property, the transferee can compel the transferor to make good the transfer out of the subsequently acquired interest. The subsequently acquired title "feeds" the earlier defective grant, making it valid and effective from the date of the original transfer. The transferor is estopped from denying the validity of the earlier transfer. Conditions for applicability: (a) A fraudulent or erroneous representation by the transferor that they have the authority to transfer. (b) Transfer for consideration. (c) The transferor subsequently acquires an interest in the property. (d) The transferee acts in good faith and without notice of the defect in title. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Transfer of Property Act, 1882: Section 43. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - Jumma Masjid, Mercara v. Kodimaniandra Deviah (1962): This is a seminal case that extensively explained the scope and conditions for the application of Section 43, emphasizing the role of representation and subsequent acquisition of interest. - Ram Pyare v. Ram Narain (1985): Further elaborated on the requirements for invoking Section 43, particularly the need for a transfer for consideration. 4. Clear Conclusion: Section 43 of the TPA embodies the doctrine of feeding the grant by estoppel, preventing a transferor from taking advantage of their own initial misrepresentation or lack of title once they acquire the promised interest, thereby protecting bona fide transferees for consideration.

Question 6

Explain the necessary conditions for the application of the doctrine of part performance. Who can avail this doctrine ?

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: The doctrine of part performance, codified in Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, is an equitable doctrine designed to protect a transferee who, in reliance on an unregistered or incomplete contract for the transfer of immovable property, has taken possession and performed their part of the contract. It acts as a shield, preventing the transferor from enforcing their legal rights (e.g., ownership) against the transferee, even if the formal requirements of transfer (like registration) are not met. Necessary Conditions for Application: (a) There must be a contract to transfer immovable property for consideration. (b) The contract must be in writing and signed by the transferor or on their behalf. (c) The terms necessary to constitute the transfer must be ascertainable with reasonable certainty from the document. (d) The transferee must have taken possession of the property or continued in possession, or done some act in furtherance of the contract. (e) The transferee must have performed or be willing to perform their part of the contract. (f) The transferee must have acted in good faith. Who can avail this doctrine? This doctrine can be availed only by the transferee as a defence (a shield) against the transferor who seeks to enforce their title or rights over the property. It cannot be used by the transferee to enforce their title (as a sword) or to compel the transferor to complete the transfer. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Transfer of Property Act, 1882: Section 53A. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - Mohd. Musa v. Aghore Kumar Ganguli (1914): Though pre-Section 53A, it recognized the equitable principle of part performance. - Shrimant Shamrao Suryavanshi v. Pralhad Bhairoba Suryavanshi (2002): Clearly laid down the conditions and scope of Section 53A, emphasizing its defensive nature. 4. Clear Conclusion: Section 53A of the TPA provides an equitable defence to a transferee who has partially performed their obligat

Question 7

Explain the doctrine of Ratification. What acts cannot be ratified?

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: Ratification, under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, is the subsequent adoption and confirmation by a person (the principal) of an act done by another person (the agent) without authority, or exceeding their authority, as if it had been done by their prior authority. When an act is ratified, it has the same effect as if the agent had been authorized to do it at the time of the act, meaning it operates retrospectively. Acts that cannot be ratified: (a) Illegal or Void Acts: An act that is unlawful or void ab initio cannot be ratified, as ratification cannot make a void act valid. (b) Acts Injuring a Third Party: An act which subjects a third person to damages, or terminates any right or interest of a third person, cannot be ratified to the prejudice of that third person. (c) Acts Not Done on Behalf of a Principal: The agent must have professed to act as an agent for an identifiable principal at the time of the act. An act done by a person on their own account cannot be subsequently ratified by another. (d) Non-existent Principal: The principal must be in existence and competent to contract at the time the act was done. (e) Lack of Knowledge: The principal must ratify with full knowledge of all material facts. Ratification made without such knowledge is not valid. (f) Ultra Vires Acts: If the act is beyond the legal capacity or powers of the principal (e.g., a company acting ultra vires its memorandum), it cannot be ratified. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Indian Contract Act, 1872: Sections 196, 197, 198, 199. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - S.N.R. Sundara Rao & Sons v. CIT (1957): Explained the retrospective effect of a valid ratification. - Narayan Chetty v. Muthiah Chetty (1907): Emphasized the requirement that the agent must profess to act for the principal for ratification to be possible. 4. Clear Conclusion: Ratification allows a principal to retrospectively validate an agent's unauthorized acts, but it is strictly governed by

Question 8

Explain and distinguish between a contract of Indemnity and a contract of Guarantee. Explain that "The liability of the surety is co-extensive with principal-debtor" ?

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: (a) Contract of Indemnity (Section 124, ICA): A contract by which one party promises to save the other from loss caused to him by the conduct of the promisor himself, or by the conduct of any other person. It involves two parties: the indemnifier (promisor) and the indemnified (promisee). The liability of the indemnifier is primary and independent. (b) Contract of Guarantee (Section 126, ICA): A contract to perform the promise, or discharge the liability, of a third person in case of his default. It involves three parties: the principal debtor (whose default is guaranteed), the creditor (to whom the guarantee is given), and the surety (who gives the guarantee). The liability of the surety is secondary and contingent upon the principal debtor's default. Distinction: - Parties: Indemnity (2 parties); Guarantee (3 parties). - Nature of Liability: Indemnifier's liability is primary; Surety's liability is secondary. - Cause of Loss: Indemnity covers loss from human agency or other events; Guarantee covers loss from principal debtor's default. - Request: Indemnity may or may not involve a request; Guarantee always involves a request from the principal debtor to the surety. "The liability of the surety is co-extensive with that of the principal debtor" (Section 128, ICA): This means that the surety is liable for all that the principal debtor is liable for, unless the contract of guarantee provides otherwise. The surety's liability is neither greater nor less than that of the principal debtor. It arises simultaneously with the principal debtor's default and covers the full extent of the principal debtor's obligation. For example, if the principal debtor defaults on a loan of ₹1 lakh plus interest, the surety is liable for the entire ₹1 lakh plus interest. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Indian Contract Act, 1872: Sections 124 (Indemnity), 126 (Guarantee), 128 (Surety's liability). 3. Important Landmark Cases: - State Bank of India v. M/s

Question 9

What are the discretion(s) and powers of the Court regarding Specific Performance and what changes are introduced by amendment of 2018?

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: (a) Discretion and Powers of the Court (Pre-2018 Amendment): Prior to the 2018 amendment, specific performance was a discretionary relief. Section 10 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (SRA) stated that specific performance may be enforced. Courts had wide discretion to refuse specific performance even if all conditions were met, based on equitable considerations such as: - Hardship to the defendant. - Unfair advantage to the plaintiff. - Uncertainty of terms. - Where compensation in money was an adequate relief. - Where the plaintiff was guilty of delay or unconscionable conduct. Courts also had powers to grant compensation in addition to or in lieu of specific performance (Section 21) and to grant injunctions. (b) Changes Introduced by the 2018 Amendment: The Specific Relief (Amendment) Act, 2018, brought a paradigm shift. It amended Section 10 to state that specific performance shall be enforced, making it a general rule rather than a discretionary remedy. This significantly curtailed judicial discretion. The amendment also: - Introduced Section 20A, prohibiting injunctions in infrastructure project contracts. - Introduced Section 20B, requiring courts to dispose of specific performance suits within 12 months. - Introduced Section 20C, allowing experts to assist the court. Exceptions where specific performance cannot be enforced (even post-amendment) are now limited to those specified in Sections 11(2), 14, and 16 of the SRA (e.g., contracts for personal service, contracts requiring continuous supervision, contracts where the plaintiff has violated essential terms). 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Specific Relief Act, 1963: Sections 10, 11(2), 14, 16, 20, 20A, 20B, 20C, 21. - Specific Relief (Amendment) Act, 2018. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - S.R. Tewari v. Union of India (1965): A pre-amendment case highlighting the discretionary nature of specific performance. - K. Prakash v. B.R. Basavaraj (2022): A post-amendment case disc

Question 10

What do you understand by the Preventive relief? What is the object of granting this relief? Distinguish between specific performance and preventive relief?

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: (a) Meaning of Preventive Relief: Preventive relief is a form of judicial remedy granted by injunction, which restrains a party from doing something that they are legally bound not to do. It aims to prevent a future wrong or the continuation of an ongoing wrong, rather than compensating for a past wrong. It is typically prohibitory in nature. (b) Object of Granting this Relief: The primary object of granting preventive relief is to prevent the violation of a legal right, maintain the status quo, and avoid irreparable injury or multiplicity of proceedings. It seeks to avert harm before it occurs or to stop its continuation, ensuring that justice is not defeated by the irreversible consequences of an unlawful act. Distinction between Specific Performance and Preventive Relief: | Feature | Specific Performance | Preventive Relief (Injunction) | |---------------------|----------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------| | Nature of Relief| Mandatory/Positive (compels performance of an act) | Prohibitory/Negative (restrains from doing an act) | | Purpose | To enforce the exact terms of a contract | To prevent a wrong or continuation of a wrong | | Scope | Primarily applicable to contracts | Applicable to various legal wrongs (contract, tort, property, etc.) | | Basis | Enforcement of contractual obligations | Prevention of infringement of legal rights | | Discretion | Mandatory post-2018 amendment (with exceptions) | Largely discretionary, based on equitable principles | 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Specific Relief Act, 1963: Part III (Sections 36-42) deals with preventive relief. - Civil Procedure Code, 1908: Order 39 (Temporary Injunctions). 3. Important Landmark Cases: - Gujarat Bottling Co. Ltd. v. Coca Cola Co. (1995): Laid down principles for granting temporary injunctions, emphasizing the balance of convenience and irreparable injury. - M.P. Mathur v. DTC (2006): Disc

Question 11

What are the circumstances under which certain period of time is excluded while computing the limitation period ? Explain.

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: The Limitation Act, 1963, prescribes periods within which legal proceedings must be initiated. However, it also provides for the exclusion of certain periods when computing the limitation period, based on the principle that a party should not be penalized for delays caused by circumstances beyond their control or by legal processes. These exclusions ensure that genuine delays do not unjustly bar a party from seeking legal redress. Circumstances for Exclusion: (a) Time for obtaining copies (Section 12): The time requisite for obtaining a copy of the decree, order, or award appealed from or sought to be reviewed, or of the judgment on which it is founded, is excluded. (b) Exclusion of time of proceeding in court without jurisdiction (Section 14): Time during which the plaintiff has been prosecuting with due diligence another civil proceeding, whether in a court of first instance or of appeal or revision, against the defendant, for the same relief, is excluded, provided the proceeding was prosecuted in good faith in a court which, from defect of jurisdiction or other cause of a like nature, was unable to entertain it. (c) Exclusion of time during which commencement of suit or execution has been stayed by injunction or order (Section 15): The time during which the institution of the suit or application for the execution of a decree has been stayed by injunction or order is excluded. (d) Exclusion of time during which defendant is absent from India (Section 15(2)). (e) Exclusion of time for notice (Section 15(3)): Time for notice required by law before instituting a suit. (f) Legal Disability (Section 6): If a person entitled to institute a suit or make an application is a minor, insane, or an idiot at the time the right accrues, the period of limitation is computed from when the disability ceases. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Limitation Act, 1963: Sections 6, 12, 14, 15. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - Madan Gopal v. Mamraj Maniram

Question 12

Write Short-notes on / संक्षिप्त टिप्पणी लिखिये : - (A) Res sub judice- Stay of suit

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: The doctrine of res sub judice (Latin for 'a matter under judgment') is a fundamental principle of civil procedure, codified in Section 10 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC). It mandates the stay of a subsequent suit if the matter in issue is directly and substantially in issue in a previously instituted suit between the same parties (or their representatives), litigating under the same title, and the previously instituted suit is pending in the same or any other competent court in India. The object of this doctrine is to prevent courts of concurrent jurisdiction from simultaneously entertaining and adjudicating upon two parallel litigations in respect of the same matter in issue, thereby avoiding multiplicity of proceedings, conflicting judgments, and harassment to the parties. Conditions for applicability: (a) Two suits: A previously instituted suit and a subsequently instituted suit. (b) Matter in issue: The matter in issue in the subsequent suit must be directly and substantially the same as in the previous suit. (c) Parties: The parties in both suits must be the same or their representatives. (d) Title: The parties must be litigating under the same title in both suits. (e) Competent Court: The previously instituted suit must be pending in a court having jurisdiction to grant the relief claimed. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Civil Procedure Code, 1908: Section 10. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - Manohar Lal Chopra v. Rai Bahadur Rao Raja Seth Hiralal (1962): This case extensively explained the object and scope of Section 10, emphasizing its mandatory nature and the conditions for its application. 4. Clear Conclusion: Section 10 CPC embodies the doctrine of res sub judice, serving as a crucial procedural safeguard to prevent parallel litigation and conflicting decisions on the same subject matter between the same parties, thereby promoting judicial efficiency and finality.

Question 13

Write Short-notes on / संक्षिप्त टिप्पणी लिखिये : - (B) Court of record

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: A 'Court of Record' is a court whose acts and proceedings are enrolled for perpetual memory and testimony. These records are of such high authority that their truth cannot be questioned in any court. The defining characteristic of a Court of Record is its inherent power to punish for contempt of itself, as well as for contempt of subordinate courts. This power is essential for maintaining the dignity, authority, and effective functioning of the judiciary. In India, the Supreme Court and the High Courts are explicitly declared to be Courts of Record by the Constitution. Powers of a Court of Record: (a) To maintain its own records and proceedings as authoritative. (b) To punish for contempt of itself, summarily and without appeal (though subject to review). (c) To punish for contempt of subordinate courts. (d) Its judgments serve as precedents for lower courts. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Constitution of India: Article 129 (Supreme Court to be a Court of Record), Article 215 (High Courts to be Courts of Record). - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: While regulating the procedure, it does not create the power but recognizes the inherent power of Courts of Record. 3. Important Landmark Cases: - Delhi Judicial Service Association v. State of Gujarat (1991): Explained the wide and inherent powers of a Court of Record, particularly concerning contempt, and its ability to protect its dignity and authority. - In Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra (1995): Further elaborated on the contempt powers of the Supreme Court as a Court of Record, including the power to punish for criminal contempt. 4. Clear Conclusion: Courts of Record, specifically the Supreme Court and High Courts in India, possess inherent powers to maintain their authority, ensure respect for the judiciary, and punish for contempt, making their records unimpeachable and their pronouncements binding precedents.

Question 14

Write Short-notes on / संक्षिप्त टिप्पणी लिखिये : - (C) Anticipatory breach of Contract.

Accepted Answer

1. Core Legal Answer & Context: Anticipatory breach of contract occurs when one party to a contract declares their intention not to perform their obligations under the contract before the performance is actually due. This repudiation can be express (by words, oral or written) or implied (by conduct, making performance impossible). The concept is based on the principle that a party should not have to wait until the actual date of performance to know if the other party intends to fulfill their obligations. Upon an anticipatory breach, the innocent party has two options: (a) Treat the contract as immediately repudiated: The innocent party can immediately treat the contract as broken, sue for damages, and is discharged from their own obligations under the contract. This is known as 'accepting the repudiation'. (b) Wait until the due date of performance: The innocent party can choose not to accept the repudiation and keep the contract alive until the actual date of performance. If they choose this option, the breaching party may still perform their obligations, or a supervening event might occur that discharges the contract (e.g., frustration), in which case the innocent party would lose their right to sue for breach. 2. Relevant Statutes and Sections: - Indian Contract Act, 1872: Section 39 (Effect of refusal of party to perform promise wholly). 3. Important Landmark Cases: - Hochster v. De La Tour (1853): This English case is the foundational authority for the doctrine of anticipatory breach, establishing the right of the innocent party to sue immediately upon repudiation. - Frost v. Knight (1872): Further developed the doctrine, confirming the options available to the innocent party. - Union of India v. G.C. Sharma (1976): An Indian case applying the principles of anticipatory breach. 4. Clear Conclusion: Anticipatory breach allows an innocent party to react to a clear repudiation of a contract before the performance date, offering the choice to either terminate the c

M.P. Civil Judge Question Paper 2019 Phase I

14 Questions Available

M.P. Civil Judge Question Paper 2019 Phase I

14 Questions Available

Question 1: Describe the protection in respect of conviction for an offence as provided in Constitution. Compare the same with the analogous provisions in Crimina

Question 2: Describe prohibition of discrimination based on sex. Explain meaning, scope and extent of term "citizen" within the purview of Constitution of India.

Question 3: When an order for injunction may be discharged, varied or set aside? What are the consequences of disobedience or breach of injunctioin?

Question 4: Explain the meaning, nature, scope and modes of setting up counter claim. Who may file counter claim and upto which stage a counter claim may be set u

Question 5: Explain the doctrine of "feeding the grant by estoppels"?

Question 6: Explain the necessary conditions for the application of the doctrine of part performance. Who can avail this doctrine ?

Question 7: Explain the doctrine of Ratification. What acts cannot be ratified?

Question 8: Explain and distinguish between a contract of Indemnity and a contract of Guarantee. Explain that "The liability of the surety is co-extensive with pr

Question 9: What are the discretion(s) and powers of the Court regarding Specific Performance and what changes are introduced by amendment of 2018?

Question 10: What do you understand by the Preventive relief? What is the object of granting this relief? Distinguish between specific performance and preventive r

Question 11: What are the circumstances under which certain period of time is excluded while computing the limitation period ? Explain.

Question 12: Write Short-notes on / संक्षिप्त टिप्पणी लिखिये : - (A) Res sub judice- Stay of suit

Question 13: Write Short-notes on / संक्षिप्त टिप्पणी लिखिये : - (B) Court of record

Question 14: Write Short-notes on / संक्षिप्त टिप्पणी लिखिये : - (C) Anticipatory breach of Contract.