AILET Legal-Aptitude: Questions 45 - 46 of 151

Get 1 year subscription: Access detailed explanations (illustrated with images and videos) to 151 questions. Access all new questions we will add tracking exam-pattern and syllabus changes. View Sample Explanation or View Features.

Rs. 150.00 or

Question number: 45

» Contract Law

Appeared in Year: 2014

MCQ▾

Question

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Every agreement, by which any party is restricted absolutely from enforcing his rights in respect of any contract, by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary tribunals, is void to that extent.

FACTUAL SITUATION: Feroz and Pinto entered into an agreement for rendering certain services. As per the prevailing law, the agreement may be enforced either at Jaipur or Udaipur. The agreement itself, however, specifies that upon breach, the parties can only approach courts at Jaipur. Feroz breaches the contract and Pinto, being a resident of Udaipur, would like to sue him in Udaipur. He challenged the validity of the clause.

Choices

Choice (4) Response

a.

Pinto will fail as he was of sound mind while entering into contract and having accepted it, he cannot now deny his obligation.

b.

Pinto will succeed as the contract does not allow him to institute any legal proceedings in any court or tribunal in Udaipur.

c.

Pinto will fail as the contract does not restrain him from instituting legal proceedings in Jaipur.

d.

Pinto will succeed as Feroz had made him suffer and the law must take his convenience into account and allow him to sue in Udaipur.

Question number: 46

» Law: Nature and Classification

Appeared in Year: 2012

MCQ▾

Question

FACTS:

In order to ensure that people live in an amicable atmosphere the Government of India decided to abolish courts and constituted Dispute Settlement Boards. Further to achieve this objective, the law stipulated that lawyers should not be allowed to espouse the claims of parties, and instead their claims be espoused by social workers.

PRINCIPLES:

(I) Any law made by the Parliament that infringes the fundamental rights of the citizens is invalid and unenforceable.

(II) Freedom to carry on trade or profession of one’s own choice is a fundamental right.

(III) The Parliament is competent to impose reasonable restrictions on the exercise of this right.

(IV) If the restrictions, on fundamental rights imposed by the Parliament, totally removes or nullifies any fundamental right then it will be construed as an unreasonable restriction.

Choices

Choice (4) Response

a.

The law made by the Parliament is invalid as it constitutes an infringement of fundamental rights and the restriction imposed is not reasonable.

b.

The law made by the Parliament is valid as it does not infringe any fundamental right.

c.

The law made by the Parliament is valid as even though there is restriction of fundamental right, such a restriction is reasonable.

d.

None of the above

Sign In