Law Quiz

1. Unless non-access is proved the presumption as to legitimacy of any child born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man is :-
(a) Rebuttable presumption of law
(b) Presumption of fact
(c) Mixed presumption of law and fact
(d) irrebuttabte presumption of law

Answer:- (d) irrebuttabte presumption of law

2. The Right of Property ceased to be Fundamental Right from:-
(a) 1975
(b) 1976
(c) 1978
(d) 1979

Answer:- (c) 1978

3. The appeal against an order of acquittal passed by the court of Judicial Magistrate first class shall lie to :-
(a) The Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate
(b) The Court of Session
(c) The High Court
(d) The supreme court

Answer:- (b) The Court of Session

4. On an application made by a person apprehending arrest on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence the High Court on the court of session may under S. 438 CrP.C. give the direction that:-
(a) He shall not be arrested till further order
(b) He shall be released on bail without taking him into custody
(c) In the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail
(d) In the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail three days after the arrest

Answer:- (c) In the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail

5. A is accused of an act which may amount to theft or receiving stolen property of criminal breach of trust or cheating He is only charged with theft but it appears that he committed the offence of criminal breach of trust.He may be :-
(a) Acquitted
(b) Convicted of theft
(c) Convicted of criminal breach of trust
(d) Discharged

Answer:- (c) Convicted of criminal breach of trust

6. Who of the following is the Chancellor of the NALSAR University of Law located in Hyderabad?
(a) Governor of A.P.
(b) The Union Law Minister
(c) Chief Justice of A.P. High Court
(d) Solicitor General of India

Answer:- (c) Chief Justice of A.P. High Court

7. In relation to the expressions defined in S. 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, Which of the following statement is not correct :-
(a) Fact includes not only physical facts but also psychological facts
(b) Court includes arbitrators
(c) An inscription on a stone is a document
(d) A fact is said to be not proved when it is neither proved nor disproved

Answer:- (b) Court includes arbitrators

8. In relation to first information report which of the following statements is not correct :-
(a) It is not a subtantive evidence
(b) It merely marks the beginning of the investigation
(c) It cannot be used as a previous statement for any purpose
(d) The informant need not be an eye witness

Answer:- (d) The informant need not be an eye witness

9. If the offence is punishable with fine only the period of limitation for taking cognizance of it shall be:-
(a) Three months
(b) Six months
(c) One year
(d) Three years

Answer:- (b) Six months

10. Under sub-section (1) of S. 146 Cr.P.C. the Magistrate may attach the subject of dispute if :-
(a) It is movable
(b) He dicides that one of the parties was in possession of the said subject
(c) He is unable to satisfy himself as to which of them was in possession of the subject of dispute
(d) In relation to that a receiver is appointed by any civil court

Answer:- (c) He is unable to satisfy himself as to which of them was in possession of the subject of dispute

Read More

Judiciary Examinations Quiz

1. Confession of an accused is irrelevant and inadmissible when made:-
(a) In the custody of a police officer but in the immediate presence of a magistrate
(b) Before a magistrate who told him that if he made a full confession he would be released.
(c) At the time when he was drunk
(d) In police custody if it leads to the discovery of any fact

Answer:- (b) Before a magistrate who told him that if he made a full confession he would be released.

2. A voluntraily confession is admissible in evidence:-
(a) When made to a police officer
(b) To a magistrate having competent jurisdiction
(c) To a Village Sarapanch with a request to save him from police
(d) Where it leads to no discovery of facts and made to the police officer

Answer:- (b) To a magistrate having competent jurisdiction

3. A hires lodgings of B and gives a card on which is written "Rooms Rs. 200 a month"A tenders oral evidence to prove a verbal agreement that these terms were to include partial board. The evidence is:-
(a) Inadmissible under S. 91 of the Indian Evidence Act
(b) Inadmissible under S. 92 of the Indian Evidence Act
(c) Admissible
(d) Irrelevant

Answer:- (a) Inadmissible under S. 91 of the Indian Evidence Act

4. For proving execution of a registrated will it shall:-
(a) Be necessary to call at least two attesting witness
(b) Be necessary to call at least one attesting witness
(c) Not necessary to call any attesting witness
(d) Be necessary to call the Registrar

Answer:- (c) Admissible

5. X sues Y for money due on a bond. The execution of the bond is admitted but Y says that it was obtained by fraud which X denies. The burden of proof is :-
(a) On Y
(b) On X
(c) On the State
(d) OnX and Y both

Answer:- (a) On Y

6. For proving execution of a registreted will it shall:-
(a) Be necessary to call at least two attesting witness
(b) Be necessary to call at least one attesting witness
(c) Not necessary to call any attesting witness
(d) Be necessary to call the Registrar

Answer:- (b) Be necessary to call at least one attesting witness

7. Telling his wife that P's wife had called him to receive payments due to him K leaves his house, After two days his dismembered body is found in a trunk, In p's trial for murder of K the statement made by K to his wife is :-
(a) Inadmissible
(b) Partly admissible
(c) Inadmissible as it does not directly relates to K's death
(d) Admissible as it relates to the circumstance of the transaction which resulted in K's death

Answer:- (d) Admissible as it relates to the circumstance of the transaction which resulted in K's death

8. 'A' prosecutes 'B' for stealing a cow from him. 'B' is convicted. 'A' afterwards sues 'C' for the cow which B had sold to him before his conviction The judgment against B is:-
(a) Relevant as between A & C
(b) Irrelevant as between A & C
(c) Is without jurisdiction
(d) Is conclusive proof against C

Answer:- (b) Irrelevant as between A & C

9. The questions is whether A was revished? As conduct the fact that without making a complaint she said that she was revished is :-
(a) Not relevant
(b) Relevant
(c) Partly relevant
(d) Neither relevant nor irrelevant

Answer:- (a) Not relevant

10. In which of the following cases, can secondary evidence of the contents of a document not be given:-
(a) When the original is a public document
(b) When the original has been destroyed
(c) When the original has been found to the inadmissble
(d) When the original is not easily movable

Answer:- (c) When the original has been found to the inadmissble

Read More

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

Decision regarding frustration of contracts

Fact: In this case, A agreed B to give him the use of a Music Hall, on certain specified days, for the purpose of holding concerts. There was no express stipulation in the contract for the event of destruction of the hall by fire. When the hall was destroyed by fire, B sued A for a breach of contract which A was unable to perform, although for no fault of his own.

Decision: The Court laid down that if there is a positive contract to do a thing (which is not unlawful in itself), the promisor must perform it or pay damages for not doing it, although in consequence of unforeseen accidents, the performance of his contract has become unexpectedly burdensome, or even impossible. However, this rule applies only when the contract is positive and absolute, and not subject to any condition, either express or implied. However, when from the nature of the contract, it appears that the parties, from the very beginning, must have known that it would not be fulfilled unless some particular specified thing continued to exist, they must have contemplated such continuing existence as the foundation of the contract.

In the present case,the Court observed that the contract cannot be construed as a positive contract, but as subject to an implied condition that the parties would be excused in case, before the breach, its performance becomes impossible from the perishing of the thing without the fault of either party.

The Court went on to give an illustration of an author undertaking to compose a work Now, if he dies without completing it, his executors are discharged from the contract. The undertaking is purely personal in nature, and by the intervention of the promisor's death, it has become impossible to be performed.

The Court, therefore, held that B could not succeed.

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

Niranjan Hemchandra Sashittal and another Vs. State of Maharashtra

The Apex Court in para 20 of the citation cited above minced absolutely no words in stating that, "It can be stated without any fear of contradiction that corruption corruption is not to be judged by degree, for corruption mothers disorder, destroys societal will to progress, accelerates undeserved ambitions, kills the consience, jettisons the glory of the institutions , paralyses the economic health of a country , corrodes the sense of civility and that immoral acquisition of wealth destroys the energy of the people believing in honesty, and history records with agony how they have suffered . The only redeeming fact is that collective sensibility respects such suffering as it is in consonance with the constitutional morality .Therefore, the relief for quashing of a trail under the Prevention of Corruption act 1988, has to be considered in above backdrop.

Read More

Decision regarding frustration of contracts

Fact: In this case, A agreed B to give him the use of a Music Hall, on certain specified days, for the purpose of holding concerts. There was no express stipulation in the contract for the event of destruction of the hall by fire. When the hall was destroyed by fire, B sued A for a breach of contract which A was unable to perform, although for no fault of his own.

Decision: The Court laid down that if there is a positive contract to do a thing (which is not unlawful in itself), the promisor must perform it or pay damages for not doing it, although in consequence of unforeseen accidents, the performance of his contract has become unexpectedly burdensome, or even impossible. However, this rule applies only when the contract is positive and absolute, and not subject to any condition, either express or implied. However, when from the nature of the contract, it appears that the parties, from the very beginning, must have known that it would not be fulfilled unless some particular specified thing continued to exist, they must have contemplated such continuing existence as the foundation of the contract.

In the present case,the Court observed that the contract cannot be construed as a positive contract, but as subject to an implied condition that the parties would be excused in case, before the breach, its performance becomes impossible from the perishing of the thing without the fault of either party.

The Court went on to give an illustration of an author undertaking to compose a work Now, if he dies without completing it, his executors are discharged from the contract. The undertaking is purely personal in nature, and by the intervention of the promisor's death, it has become impossible to be performed.

The Court, therefore, held that B could not succeed.

Read More