Indian Penal Code

Q.1. A spits B, A would be liable for offence of--

[A] using criminal force

[B] annoyance

[C] defamation

[D] assault

Ans:[D] assault

Q.2. Which section section of I.P.C. defines sedition?

[A] section 123

[B] section 124A

[C] section 124

[D] section 159

Ans: [B] section 124A

Q.3. Disclosuer of identity of victim of rape is punishable under--

[A] section 375 I.P.C.

[B] section 376 I.P.C.

[C] section 228A I.P.C.

[D] section 228 I.P.C.

 

Ans:[D] section 228 I.P.C.

Q.4. Which one of the following section of Indian Penal code deals with vicarious liability?

[A] section 154

[B] section 159

[C] section 124

[D] section 123

Ans:[A] section 154

Q.5.Minimum number of persons required to commit an affray is--

[A] two

[B] one

[C] three

[D] ten

Ans: [A] two

Read More

Civil Laws - PARTIES TO SUIT AND FRAME OF SUIT

Q 1. What is Counter -Claim

Ans: A claim made by the defendant in a suit against the plaintiff is called 'Counter-claim.
Supreme Court of India in Mohinder Singh v.Data Ram observed in a suit the defendant may set up a counter-claim against the plaintiff in order to make the relief sought by him unsuccessful, but such counter-claim can be made only in respect of such a right for which the defendant could file a separate suit.

Q 2. Explain the expression 'Proper Party'

Ans: A party whose presence enable the court to adjudicate the disputed matter more effectively and completely. In other words it can be said that party is said to be a proper party whose presence is not 'must' but his presence helps the court to adjudicate the disputed question more effectively and completely.

Q 3.What is the meaning of Non-Joinder or Misjoinder of Parties?

Ans: When a person, who is necessary or proper party to a suit but did not join as a party to the suit, it is a case of non-joinder of parties. On the other hand, if two or more persons are joined as plaintiffs or defendants in one suit contrary to the provisions of Order 1,Rule 1,who may be as plaintiffs and rule 3, who may be joined as defendants respectively and they are neither necessary nor proper parties, it is a case of mis-joinder of parties.

Read More

Indian Penal Code

Section 1. This Act shall be called the Indian Penal Code,and shall extend to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

Section 2. Every person shall be liable to punishment under this Code and not otherwise for every act or omission contrary to the provisions thereof, of which he shall be guilty within India.

Section 3. Any person liable ,by any Indian law ,to be tried for an offence committed beyond India shall be dealt with according to the provisions of this Code for any act committed beyond India in the same manner as if such act had been committed within India.

Section 4. The provisions of this Code apply also to any offence committed by---
(1) any citizen of India in any place without and beyond India;
(2) any person on any ship or aircraft registered in India wherever it may be

Explanation - In this section the word "offence" includes every act committed outside India which, if committed in India, would be punishable under this Code

Man - The word "man" denotes a male human being of any age.
Woman- The word "woman" denotes a female human being of any age.
Person- The word "person" includes any Company or Association or body of persons, whether incorporated or not.

Read More

Problem: Under Indian Contract Act 1872

Question 1: Over a cup of coffee at a restaurant, 'A' invites 'B' to a dinner at his house on a Sunday 'B' hires a taxi and reaches A's house at the appointed time, but 'A' fails to perform his promise. 'B' sues 'A' for damages for breach of contract. Would 'B' succeed?

Answer: One of the essential elements of contract is that the parties must intend to create a legal relation. In this problem invitation by 'A' to 'B' for dinner has not been given with an intention to create any legal relation but to create only social relations. Intention to create social or moral relations or obligation does not give rise to a valid agreement [contract].Thus in this problem there is no contract between 'A' and 'B'. Hence, no question of breach arises and if there is no question of breach of contract, no question of damages for breach of contract arises and 'B' Would not succeed in this case.

Read More