Perincuriam from Legal Aptitude Law - Facts and Concepts

Previous Year Papers

Download Solved Question Papers Free for Offline Practice and view Solutions Online.

Test Series

Take Zigya Full and Sectional Test Series. Time it out for real assessment and get your results instantly.

Test Yourself

Practice and master your preparation for a specific topic or chapter. Check you scores at the end of the test.
Advertisement

 Multiple Choice QuestionsMultiple Choice Questions

501.

Principle: Acceptance of a proposal must be absolute and unqualified.

Facts: ‘A’ made a proposal to sell his motorcycle to ‘B’ for rupees 25,000/-. ‘B’ agreed to buy it for rupees 24,000/-. ‘A’ sold his motorcycle to ‘C’ for 26,000/- the next day. ‘B’ sues ‘A’ for damages.

  •  ‘B’ will get damages from ‘A’

  •  ‘B’ will get the difference of rupees 1,000/- only

  •  ‘B’ can proceed against ‘C’

  •  ‘B’ can proceed against ‘C’

58 Views

502.

Principle: A person is said to do a thing fraudulently, if he does that thing with intent to defraud, but not otherwise.

Facts: 'A' occasionally hands over his ATM card to 'B' to withdraw money for 'A'. On one occasion 'B' without the knowledge of 'A', uses 'A's ATM card to find out the balance in 'A's account, but does not withdraw any money.

  •  B' has not committed the act fraudulently

  • 'B' has committed the act fraudulently

  •  'B' has committed breach of faith

  •  'B' has committed breach of faith

114 Views

503.

Principle: Where one of the parties to a contract was in a position to dominate the decision of the other party, the contract is enforceable only at the option of the party who was in a position to dominate the decision of the other party.
Facts: A doctor asked his patient to make a payment of rupees Ten Lakh for treatment of his fever. The patient paid an amount of rupees Five Lakh and promised to pay the remaining amount after the treatment. After treatment the patient recovered from fever. The doctor demanded the remaining amount from the patient. The patient refused to pay.

  • The contract is not enforceable without the consent of the patient.

  • The contract is not enforceable as doctor was in dominating position.

  • The contract is enforceable against the doctor.

  • The contract is enforceable against the doctor.

64 Views

504.

Principle: Negligence is actionable in law. In simple terms, negligence is the failure to take proper care over something.
Facts: A, a doctor, conducted a hysterectomy sincerely on B and left a small cotton swab inside the abdomen. As a consequence of which B developed some medical problems and had to undergo another surgery. Is A liable?

  • A is not liable as he did not foresee any consequences at the time of surgery.

  • A is liable for the negligence as he failed to take proper care during the surgery.

  • Liability for negligence does not arise here as A performed the operation sincerely

  • Liability for negligence does not arise here as A performed the operation sincerely

95 Views

Advertisement
505.

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':

  • 'P' can claim damages from 'S'

  • 'P' is required to pay expenses for surgery for Appendicitis but not for Gall
    Bladder

  • 'P' cannot claim damages from 'S'

  • 'P' cannot claim damages from 'S'

45 Views

506.

Principle: There are legal provisions to give authority to a person to use necessary force against an assailant or wrong-doer for the purpose of protecting one’s own body and property as also another’s body and property when immediate aid from the state machinery is not readily available; and in so doing he is not answerable in law for his deeds.
Facts: X, a rich man was taking his morning walk. Due to the threat of robbers in the locality, he was carrying his pistol also. From the opposite direction, another person was coming with a ferocious looking dog. All of a sudden, the dog which was on a chain held by the owner, started barking at X. The owner of the dog called the dog to be calm. They crossed each other without any problem. But suddenly, the dog started barking again from a distance. X immediately took out his pistol. By seeing the pistol the dog stopped barking and started walking with the owner. However, X shot at the dog which died instantly. The owner of the dog files a complaint against X, which in due course reached the Magistrate Court. X pleads the right of private defence. Decide.

  • Shooting a fierce dog is not to be brought under the criminal law. So the case should be dismissed.

  • There was no imminent danger to X as the dog stopped barking and was walking with the owner. Hence, shooting it amounted to excessive use of the right of private defence and hence liable for killing the dog.

  • The right of private defence is available to persons against assailants or wrongdoers only and a dog does not fall in this category.

  • The right of private defence is available to persons against assailants or wrongdoers only and a dog does not fall in this category.

52 Views

Advertisement

507.

Perincuriam

  • Mistaken identity

  • Mistaken decision

  • Supremacy of the Constitution

  • Supremacy of the Constitution


B.

Mistaken decision

61 Views

Advertisement
508.

Autrefois convict

  • Formerly convicted

  • Failed prosecution

  • To be convicted

  • To be convicted

65 Views

Advertisement
509.

Lex loci

  • Domestic laws

  • Law of a place

  • Latin regualtions

  • Latin regualtions

58 Views

510.

Lis pendens

  • Pending suit

  • Decided case

  • No legal issues involved

  • No legal issues involved

58 Views

Advertisement