Legal IQ

MCQs For Law Entrance – CLAT -2017

1. Principle: Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.
Facts: ‘A’, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill ‘B’. ‘B’ to save his life kills ‘A’.
(a) ‘B’ has committed an offence
(b) ‘B’ has not committed any offence
(c) ‘A’ has not committed an offence because he was mad
(d) ‘A’ has committed the offence of attempt to murder.

2. Principle: According to law, a person is deemed to have attained the age of majority when he completes the age of 18 years, except in the case of a person where a guardian of a minor’s person or property has been appointed under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 or where the superintendence of a minor’s property is assumed by a Court of Wards. Indian law expressly forbids a minor from entering into a contract. Hence, any contract entered into by a minor is void-ab-initio regardless of whether the other party was aware of his minority or not. Further, though a minor is not competent to contract, nothing in the Contract Act prevents him from making the other party bound to the minor.
Facts: Lal executed a promissory note in favour of Gurudutt, aged 16 years stating that he would pay Gurudutt a sum of ` 2 lakhs when he attains the age of majority. On attaining the age of 18, Gurudutt demanded the amount from Lal, who refused to pay. Gurudutt wants to take legal action against Lal.
(a) Lal argues that as per the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, Gurudutt can claim the money only after he attains the age of 21
(b) Lal was not aware of the fact that Gurudutt was a minor
(c) Gurudutt should not have entered into a contract with Lal when he was a minor
(d) A promissory note duly executed in favour of a minor is not void and can be sued upon by him, because he though incompetent to contract, may yet accept a benefit.

3. Principle: Whoever takes away with him any minor less than sixteen years of age if a male, or less than eighteen years of age if a female, out of the custody of parents of such minor without the consent of such parents, is said to commit no offence.
Facts: ‘A’, a man, took away a girl below sixteen years to Mumbai without informing the parents of the girl.
(a) ‘A’ committed an offence against the girl
(b) ‘A’ committed no offence against the girl as well as her parents
(c) ‘A’ committed no offence against the parents of the girl
(d) ‘A’ committed an offence against the girl as well as her parents.

4. Principle: When a person consented to an act to be done by another, he cannot claim any damages resulting from doing that act, provided the act done is the same for which consent is given.
Facts: ‘P’ submitted a written consent to a surgeon ‘S’ for undergoing a surgical operation for removal of appendicitis. The surgeon while doing surgery also removed the gall bladder of ‘A’:
(a) ‘P’ can claim damages from ‘S’
(b) ‘P’ is not bound to pay expenses of the surgery
(c) ‘P’ cannot claim damages from ‘S’
(d) ‘P’ is required to pay expenses for surgery for Appendicitis but not for Gall Bladder.


Answers: 1 (b), 2 (d), 3 (b), 4 (a)

Leave a Comment