I85PREP
⌘ K
WBJS Civil Judge Exam study materials
WBJS Civil Judge Exam study resources

WBJS Civil Judge Exam practice questions

One question at a time. Build your WBJS Civil Judge Exam understanding.

First 50 of 200 questions. Each one lists the choices, the correct answer, and an explanation. The checker at the top of this page saves progress in this browser when it is available.

Continue in the practice tool above to load more questions, 50 at a time.

Question 1Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A lends ₹50,000 to B, who is aged seventeen, on B's written promise to repay the sum with interest. B refuses to repay and A sues on the promise. Under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the agreement is-

  1. valid, because the minor obtained the benefit of the loan
  2. enforceable against the minor on his attaining majority
  3. void, since an agreement with a minor is void ab initio Correct answer.
  4. voidable at the option of the minor

Explanation

Under Section 11, read with Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose, an agreement by a minor is void ab initio and is not capable of ratification on attaining majority. The lender cannot sue upon the agreement itself, though restitution or relief under Section 65 may be available in an appropriate case.

Question 2Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

In a civil action for defamation, the defendant proves that the imputation complained of was substantially true. The defence that succeeds on that proof is-

  1. innocent dissemination
  2. fair comment
  3. justification Correct answer.
  4. absolute privilege

Explanation

In a civil action for defamation, truth pleaded as the defence of justification is a complete answer, and the defendant must show that the imputation is substantially true. Fair comment, by contrast, protects an expression of opinion on a matter of public interest and cannot justify a false statement of fact.

Question 3Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A, out of natural love and affection for his brother B, promises in a registered instrument to pay B ₹1,00,000, though B gives nothing in return. The promise-

  1. is void for want of consideration
  2. takes effect only as a testamentary disposition on A's death
  3. is enforceable only if B renders some service to A in return
  4. is enforceable, being in writing and registered and made out of natural love and affection Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 25(1) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 preserves a promise made out of natural love and affection where it is in writing and registered, even though no consideration moves. All three requirements - natural love and affection, writing, and registration - must be satisfied.

Question 4Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A agrees in writing to sell his house to B, receives the price, and puts B in possession, but the sale deed is never executed and A later refuses to complete it. In B's suit, the doctrine of part performance under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882-

  1. bars A from enforcing against B his rights in the property, though it confers no title on B Correct answer.
  2. is unavailable because the agreement was not registered
  3. confers a title on B from the date of the agreement
  4. is unavailable because the sale deed has not been executed

Explanation

Section 53A protects a transferee who holds a written contract from which the terms can be ascertained, has performed or is willing to perform his part, and has been put in possession. The doctrine operates only as a shield: it bars the transferor from asserting his rights, but the transferee does not thereby acquire title and must sue for specific performance.

Question 5Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A has for twenty-five years used a cart-track across B's field to reach the highway. He now claims an easement by prescription under the Indian Easements Act, 1882. A must establish that the use was-

  1. enjoyed with B's permission for more than twenty years
  2. supported by payment of rent to B throughout the period
  3. secret and intermittent, but continued for thirty years
  4. open, peaceable and as of right for not less than twenty years Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 15 permits an easement by prescription where the right has been peaceably and openly enjoyed as of right, without interruption, for twenty years. Enjoyment under permission is a licence rather than an easement, and secret or permissive use cannot mature into a prescriptive right however long it continues.

Question 6Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

Under the Specific Relief Act, 1963, as amended in 2018, a plaintiff seeking specific performance of a contract for sale of immovable property-

  1. cannot obtain the relief unless the agreement to sell is registered
  2. can obtain the relief only if the seller has refused performance in writing
  3. is ordinarily entitled to the relief unless the contract is one that cannot be specifically enforced under the Act Correct answer.
  4. must first prove that damages would be an inadequate remedy

Explanation

After the Specific Relief (Amendment) Act, 2018, specific performance is the ordinary remedy for breach of contract, and the court grants it unless the contract falls within Section 14 or another statutory bar applies. The earlier requirement that the plaintiff demonstrate the inadequacy of damages no longer governs the grant of relief.

Question 7Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

An elderly widow living in dependence on her spiritual adviser transfers her only house to him for a nominal consideration, and the transaction appears unconscionable. Under Section 16 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the burden of proving that the transaction was not induced by undue influence lies on-

  1. the spiritual adviser, because he was in a position to dominate her will and the transaction is unconscionable Correct answer.
  2. the widow, because she has alleged undue influence
  3. the spiritual adviser, because he has merely denied the allegation
  4. neither party, because undue influence renders the transaction void

Explanation

Where the parties are so placed that one can dominate the will of the other and the transaction appears unconscionable, Section 16(3) casts the burden of disproving undue influence on the dominant party. A spiritual adviser dealing with a dependent widow is a classic illustration of such a relationship of ascendancy.

Question 8Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A factory stores large quantities of inflammable material in a reservoir on its premises. The material escapes through the independent act of a stranger and damages the adjoining land. Under the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, the factory-

  1. is not liable, because the escape was caused by the act of a stranger, which is a recognised exception Correct answer.
  2. is liable, because storing inflammable material is itself unlawful
  3. is liable, because the rule imposes liability irrespective of any defence
  4. is not liable, because the storage was for a lawful purpose and reasonable care was taken

Explanation

The rule in Rylands v Fletcher makes the occupier liable for the escape of a dangerous thing brought on his land, irrespective of negligence, but the liability is strict and not absolute. Escape caused by the unforeseeable act of a stranger, by the plaintiff's own default, or by an act of God is a recognised exception.

Question 9Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A is dispossessed of his shop without his consent on 1 March. On 1 June he sues under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 for recovery of possession, without proving his title. The court may-

  1. restore possession only if A proves that he was the lawful owner
  2. restore possession after a summary inquiry, and no appeal lies from that decree Correct answer.
  3. refuse relief, because a suit for possession must be founded on title
  4. restore possession, and an appeal lies to the High Court against the decree

Explanation

Section 6 provides a summary remedy for a person dispossessed of immovable property otherwise than in due course of law, available if the suit is brought within six months of the dispossession. The court decides the question of possession and not of title, and Section 6(3) bars any appeal from the decree.

Question 10Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A, the real owner of land, so conducts himself that his brother B is reasonably believed to be its owner. B sells the land to C, who purchases for value after making the usual enquiries and in good faith. Under Section 41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882-

  1. C acquires a good title only if A subsequently ratifies the sale in writing
  2. C acquires a title voidable at A's option, since A may recover the land on refund of the price
  3. C acquires a good title, because the transfer was made by an ostensible owner with A's implied consent and C acted in good faith after reasonable inquiry Correct answer.
  4. C acquires no title, because B was not the owner and a non-owner can convey nothing

Explanation

Section 41 protects a transferee who takes from an ostensible owner for consideration and in good faith after taking reasonable care to ascertain that the transferor had power to transfer. The real owner is then precluded from disputing the transfer, because it was made with his express or implied consent.

Question 11Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A sells the goodwill of his cloth business to B and covenants in the sale deed that he will not carry on any cloth business within the municipal limits of the town for five years. B continues the same business. Two years later, A opens a competing cloth shop in the town. Which statement is correct?

  1. It is valid to the extent it is a reasonable local restriction on a seller of goodwill. Correct answer.
  2. It is enforceable only if the covenant is registered as a separate deed of restraint.
  3. The covenant is wholly void, because the Indian Contract Act, 1872 renders every agreement in restraint of trade illegal and unenforceable.
  4. It is void for want of consideration, because A received nothing separately for his promise not to compete with B.

Explanation

Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 voids agreements in restraint of trade, but it expressly saves a covenant given by the seller of a business's goodwill. The buyer must carry on a like business, and the local limit and duration must be reasonable. A's covenant therefore binds him, and his later shop is a breach.

Question 12Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A agrees to supply B with 200 bags of rice 'on or before 15 July, time being expressly of the essence of the contract'. A delivers on 25 July, and B refuses to accept the consignment. Which statement is correct?

  1. B must accept the goods but may deduct 10 per cent of the price as compensation for the delay in delivery.
  2. The contract automatically became void on 15 July, without any election by B, because time was of the essence.
  3. B may reject the goods and treat the contract as at an end, since time was of the essence. Correct answer.
  4. B must accept the goods, because late delivery is only a breach of contract that sounds in damages and does not entitle B to reject them.

Explanation

Under Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, where the parties make time of the essence and a party fails to perform by the agreed date, the contract becomes voidable at the option of the promisee. B may therefore rescind and reject the late consignment, or waive the delay and claim damages. A's late delivery does not compel B to accept.

Question 13Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A, B's former employer, writes to C, a prospective employer who has asked for a reference, that B was dismissed for dishonesty. A honestly believes the statement to be true, though it later proves unfounded. In B's action for defamation, which defence is most apt?

  1. Absolute privilege, because every communication concerning a person's employment is absolutely protected, whatever the motive.
  2. Qualified privilege, since the reference was made on a privileged occasion and no malice is shown. Correct answer.
  3. Fair comment, because the statement concerns B's character and is an expression of opinion on a matter of interest to the employer.
  4. Justification, because A honestly believed the statement to be true when he wrote it to C.

Explanation

A communication made in good faith in the discharge of a duty, or for the protection of an interest, to a person with a corresponding interest is protected by qualified privilege. The protection is lost only if the plaintiff proves express malice. A's honest reference therefore falls within the privilege.

Question 14Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

B is prosecuted by A on a criminal complaint of theft and is acquitted. B sues A for malicious prosecution. Which combination of elements must B establish?

  1. Only that B was acquitted and suffered loss of reputation in the criminal case.
  2. Institution by A, absence of reasonable and probable cause, malice, and termination in B's favour. Correct answer.
  3. Prosecution without reasonable cause and malice, irrespective of whether the prosecution ended in B's favour.
  4. Only that A bore a grudge against B and that the criminal complaint ultimately failed.

Explanation

In an action for malicious prosecution the plaintiff must prove that the defendant instituted or continued the prosecution, that it was without reasonable and probable cause, that it was actuated by malice, and that it terminated in the plaintiff's favour. Damage to reputation or person must also be shown. All the elements must concur.

Question 15Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A orally gifts his plot, worth ₹5,00,000, to his nephew B and hands over possession, but no registered gift deed is executed and the transaction is merely attested by two witnesses. Which statement is correct?

  1. The gift is valid, because possession of the plot was delivered to B and B accepted it.
  2. The gift is valid, because it was attested by two witnesses even though it was not registered.
  3. The gift is valid, because a gift is gratuitous and the law prescribes no formality for it.
  4. The gift is invalid, because a gift of immovable property requires a registered instrument. Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 123 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 requires a gift of immovable property to be effected by a registered instrument signed by the transferor and attested by at least two witnesses. Delivery of possession does not substitute for registration. The oral gift is therefore invalid.

Question 16Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A files a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell B's land. While the suit is pending, B sells the land to C, who has notice of the suit. Which statement is correct?

  1. C takes a good title, because the pending suit was for specific performance and not for possession.
  2. C takes a title free from the litigation, because he purchased the land before any decree was passed.
  3. C is bound only if he is later impleaded as a party to the pending suit for specific performance.
  4. C is bound by the decree, because the transfer was pendente lite and C had notice. Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 makes a transfer pendente lite subject to the decree in the suit. The transferee is bound where the suit is not collusive, a right to the immovable property is directly in question, and the transferee has notice. C had notice, so the later decree binds him.

Question 17Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

B has built a wall on his own land and A threatens to demolish it. B sues for a perpetual injunction under the Specific Relief Act, 1963. Which statement correctly states the court's approach?

  1. A perpetual injunction may be refused solely because the plaintiff has some other remedy available.
  2. A perpetual injunction is granted only where the plaintiff proves an actual pecuniary loss.
  3. A perpetual injunction is available only in suits for recovery of possession of immovable property.
  4. A perpetual injunction may be granted where compensation in money would not afford adequate relief. Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 allows a perpetual injunction to prevent the breach of an obligation existing in the plaintiff's favour. Where the defendant invades or threatens the plaintiff's right to enjoy property, the court may grant relief where no standard exists to ascertain actual damage or money compensation would be inadequate. The adequacy of damages is therefore central.

Question 18Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A sells one of two adjoining plots to B. B's plot has no access to a public road except over the plot retained by A. Which statement best describes B's legal position?

  1. B must use the way for twenty years before any right of easement arises in his favour.
  2. B has an easement of necessity over A's retained plot, implied by the severance. Correct answer.
  3. B has no right of way, because no easement was expressly granted in the sale deed.
  4. B has only a revocable licence over A's plot, which A may terminate at any time.

Explanation

Section 13 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882 implies an easement of necessity where a tenement is severed and one part cannot be enjoyed without a right over the other. The right arises by operation of law and does not depend on an express grant or on twenty years' user. It continues only so long as the necessity exists.

Question 19Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A agrees to supply machinery to B by 1 March. The contract states that breach by A will require payment of ₹5,00,000 as 'agreed damages'. A breaches, and B proves actual loss of ₹1,50,000. Which statement is correct under the Indian Contract Act, 1872?

  1. B may recover reasonable compensation not exceeding ₹5,00,000, measured by the loss proved. Correct answer.
  2. B must be awarded the full ₹5,00,000, because the parties fixed that sum by agreement.
  3. B may recover ₹5,00,000 plus the proved loss of ₹1,50,000, since both are due.
  4. B gets nothing, because a clause fixing a sum payable on breach is a penalty and void.

Explanation

Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 entitles the aggrieved party to reasonable compensation not exceeding the sum named in the contract, whether or not actual loss is proved. The stipulated figure is a ceiling, not an automatic entitlement. As B has proved a loss of ₹1,50,000, the court will ordinarily award that amount.

Question 20Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A purports to sell to B, for value, a plot to which A has no title, and B, who has no notice of the defect, takes possession under the sale. A later acquires title to the plot. Which statement is correct?

  1. The sale is void ab initio, and B must surrender possession of the plot to A.
  2. B may enforce the sale against the interest A later acquires, at B's option. Correct answer.
  3. The later-acquired title belongs to A alone, because a seller cannot transfer what he does not own.
  4. Title passes automatically to B the moment A acquires it, without any election by B.

Explanation

Section 43 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 embodies the doctrine of feeding the estoppel. Where a transferor represents that he is authorised to transfer immovable property, and later acquires an interest in it, the transferee may at his option enforce the transfer against the acquired interest if he acted in good faith and for consideration. B therefore has an election, not an automatic title.

Question 21Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

At B's request, A repairs B's roof in June. In July, B promises in writing to pay A ₹10,000 for that repair. B later refuses to pay. Which statement is correct under the Indian Contract Act, 1872?

  1. A cannot recover, because no fresh consideration moved from A in July.
  2. A can recover only if B's promise is registered.
  3. A cannot recover, because past consideration is never valid consideration.
  4. A can recover, because the repair was past consideration rendered at B's request. Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 2(d) recognises past consideration, and an act already done at the promisor's desire can support a later promise. A repaired the roof at B's request, so B's written promise to pay is enforceable. Registration is not required for such a promise.

Question 22Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A, a spectator at a cricket match, sits behind the boundary rope knowing that sixes may be hit into the crowd. A is struck by a ball hit by the batsman. In A's suit against the batsman, which defence is most directly available?

  1. Statutory authority, because the match was lawfully organised.
  2. Volenti non fit injuria, because A freely accepted the known risk of injury. Correct answer.
  3. Act of God, because the injury was caused by an unexpected event.
  4. Inevitable accident, because the ball was hit in the ordinary course of the game.

Explanation

Volenti non fit injuria applies where the claimant, with full knowledge of the risk, freely consents to undergo it. A knowingly sat in an area exposed to hit balls, so consent to that inherent risk is the defence directly raised. The other defences do not rest on A's voluntary acceptance of the risk.

Question 23Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

Under Section 14 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, a transfer cannot create an interest taking effect after the lifetime of one or more persons living at the date of transfer and the minority of a person in existence at the expiration of that period. Which period of minority applies for this purpose?

  1. A fixed period of eighteen years from the date of the transfer, irrespective of any life in being.
  2. A fixed period of twenty-one years from the date of the transfer.
  3. The minority of the person under the Indian Majority Act, 1875, which is twenty-one years where a guardian is appointed.
  4. The minority of the person, which for this purpose is eighteen years. Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 14 permits vesting within the lifetime of the last life in being plus the minority of the person then in existence. For this purpose the minority is treated as eighteen years. The section does not prescribe a fixed period running from the date of transfer.

Question 24Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A agrees to supply B with 100 tonnes of steel on 1 December. On 1 October, A informs B that he will not supply the steel. Which statement is correct?

  1. B must wait until 1 December before filing any suit for damages.
  2. B can sue only if A's refusal is in writing.
  3. B may treat the contract as at an end and sue immediately for damages. Correct answer.
  4. B loses the right to sue if he does not reply to A's refusal within seven days.

Explanation

Section 39 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 deals with anticipatory breach. When a party refuses to perform before the due date, the promisee may put an end to the contract and sue immediately, or may keep the contract alive. No waiting until 1 December or formal reply is required.

Question 25Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

B employs A as a lorry driver. While driving B's lorry on B's business, A gives a lift to a stranger contrary to B's express instructions and, by negligent driving, injures C. In C's suit against B, which statement is correct?

  1. B is liable, because A was acting in the course of employment. Correct answer.
  2. B is not liable, because the stranger was a trespasser in the lorry.
  3. B is not liable, because A exceeded his express instructions.
  4. B is liable only if B authorised the giving of the lift.

Explanation

An employer is vicariously liable for torts committed by a servant in the course of employment. Driving the lorry was authorised work, and giving a lift contrary to instructions was merely an improper mode of doing that work. Exceeding instructions does not by itself take the act outside the course of employment.

Question 26Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A transfers his land to B by a registered deed. The deed contains a condition that B shall not transfer the land to any person and that any transfer shall be void. Which statement is correct under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?

  1. The condition is void, because it imposes an absolute restraint on B's power of alienation. Correct answer.
  2. The condition is valid only if it is reasonable and limited in time.
  3. The condition is valid, because a transferor may impose any condition he pleases.
  4. The condition is valid, but B's later transfer would only be voidable at A's option.

Explanation

Section 10 provides that a condition absolutely restraining the transferee from disposing of his interest is void. A condition restraining alienation to a particular person, however, is valid. A blanket bar on transfer to any person is therefore void.

Question 27Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A is in possession of land. B denies A's title and threatens to disturb A's possession. A sues only for a declaration that he is the owner, without seeking recovery of possession. Which statement is correct under the Specific Relief Act, 1963?

  1. The suit is not maintainable, because a declaration cannot be granted unless possession is also claimed.
  2. The suit is maintainable only if B has actually dispossessed A before the suit is filed.
  3. The suit is maintainable, because A is in possession and seeks a declaration of his legal right. Correct answer.
  4. The suit is not maintainable, because title cannot be declared without a prayer for injunction.

Explanation

Section 34 permits a suit for a declaration of legal character or right. A person already in possession may seek a declaration of title without claiming possession, since possession itself protects him against dispossession. An injunction is not a mandatory companion relief in every such suit.

Question 28Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A negligently discharges oil into a harbour. The oil spreads and is carried by wind and tide onto B's wharf. Sparks from welding on B's wharf ignite the oil, destroying the wharf. Fire damage of that type was not reasonably foreseeable from the oil discharge. In B's suit against A, which statement is correct?

  1. A is not liable for the fire damage, because the type of damage was not reasonably foreseeable. Correct answer.
  2. A is liable because oil is a dangerous substance and liability is strict.
  3. A is liable for all direct consequences of the oil discharge, including the fire.
  4. A is liable because B's welding work was an intervening act.

Explanation

The foreseeability test in tort limits liability to damage of a type that a reasonable person could foresee. A's discharge of oil was negligent, but if fire damage was not a foreseeable type of harm, A is not liable for that damage. Directness alone does not impose liability for an unforeseeable kind of harm.

Question 29Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A owns plot P and has a right of way over adjoining plot Q. A takes a lease of plot Q from its owner for three years. What is the effect of the lease on A's easement over Q?

  1. The easement is suspended during the lease and revives when the lease ends. Correct answer.
  2. The easement is extinguished permanently by the lease.
  3. The easement is converted into a licence for the lease period.
  4. The easement continues unaffected, because ownership of Q has not transferred to A.

Explanation

Section 49 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882 provides that an easement is suspended when the owner of the dominant heritage becomes lessee of the servient heritage. The suspension lasts for the period of the lease, and the easement revives when the lease ends. It is not permanently extinguished by the lease.

Question 30Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A sells a horse to B. A knows the horse is unsound but says nothing about it, and B asks no questions. Which statement is correct under the Indian Contract Act, 1872?

  1. A commits misrepresentation even if he merely remains silent.
  2. A's silence is not fraud unless he had a duty to disclose or his silence was equivalent to speech. Correct answer.
  3. B can avoid the contract only if the defect is discovered within thirty days.
  4. A commits fraud, because he knowingly concealed a material fact.

Explanation

Section 17 provides that mere silence as to facts likely to affect a person's willingness to contract is not fraud. Silence becomes fraudulent only where the circumstances create a duty to speak, or where the silence is equivalent to speech. No fixed thirty-day period governs avoidance on this ground.

Question 31Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A offers by letter posted on 1 June to sell his car to B, asking for acceptance by post. B posts acceptance on 5 June, and A receives it on 8 June. A then sends a telegram revoking the offer, which reaches B on 6 June. Which statement states the legal position under the Indian Contract Act, 1872?

  1. Acceptance binds A only when the letter reaches him on 8 June, so the telegram of 6 June is effective.
  2. Acceptance binds A from 5 June; the telegram of 6 June comes too late. Correct answer.
  3. Acceptance binds A on 5 June only against B; the telegram is therefore effective.
  4. No contract arises, because A revoked the offer before he received the acceptance.

Explanation

Under Section 4 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, communication of acceptance is complete as against the proposer when the letter is posted, and as against the acceptor when it reaches the proposer. A revocation of offer must reach the acceptor before acceptance is complete against the proposer. Since B posted acceptance on 5 June, A's telegram of 6 June is too late.

Question 32Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A, standing on his balcony, points an unloaded gun at B in the street below and says he will shoot. B believes the gun is loaded and is frightened. Which tort, if any, has A committed?

  1. False imprisonment, because B was unable to move away.
  2. Assault, because B reasonably apprehended imminent harmful or offensive contact. Correct answer.
  3. No tort, because the gun was unloaded and there was no contact.
  4. Battery, because B suffered fright and distress.

Explanation

Assault is an intentional act that causes another reasonably to apprehend imminent harmful or offensive contact; actual contact is not required. Pointing a gun, even if unloaded, can be assault where the claimant reasonably believes it is loaded. Battery requires actual contact, and false imprisonment requires total restraint.

Question 33Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A, who has no present right in his father's estate, purports to transfer to B for consideration his expected share in the estate that will devolve on him on his father's death. The father is alive. Which statement is correct under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?

  1. The transfer is voidable at B's option until the father dies.
  2. The transfer is void because it is a transfer of a mere chance of succession. Correct answer.
  3. The transfer is valid because it is for consideration and concerns immovable property.
  4. The transfer is valid only if the father consents in writing.

Explanation

Section 6(a) of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, excludes the transfer of a mere chance of an heir-apparent succeeding to an estate. Such a transfer is void, even if made for consideration. The father's consent cannot validate a spes successionis.

Question 34Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A contracts to hire B's hall for a wedding on 10 May. On 1 April a government order closes all halls in the district for public gatherings for three months. A informs B that he will not pay and treats the contract as at an end. Which statement is correct?

  1. The contract remains enforceable because the closure might be lifted early.
  2. The contract is frustrated, and both parties are discharged from further performance. Correct answer.
  3. B can claim the full hire because frustration excuses only the hirer's payment.
  4. A is in anticipatory breach because he refused to perform before 10 May.

Explanation

A supervening event that makes performance impossible or unlawful discharges the parties automatically under the doctrine of frustration. The government closure for the entire wedding period defeats the purpose of the contract, so A is not in anticipatory breach. The parties are excused from future performance.

Question 35Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A enters into a contract to serve as a chef in B's restaurant for two years. A refuses to join. B sues for specific performance and damages. Which relief can the court grant under the Specific Relief Act, 1963?

  1. Specific performance with a daily penalty for A's continued refusal.
  2. A declaration that the contract is void, with compensation for B.
  3. Damages only; personal service contracts are not specifically enforceable. Correct answer.
  4. Specific performance, because B cannot find a suitable replacement chef.

Explanation

A contract of personal service is not specifically enforceable because it depends on personal qualifications and involves continuous supervision. The court may instead award damages if the claimant has claimed them. It will not compel A to work under a daily penalty.

Question 36Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A has a right of way over B's land, acquired by grant. A stops using the way altogether for 22 years while B remains owner. A then resumes use. Which statement is correct under the Indian Easements Act, 1882?

  1. The easement is extinguished only if B obstructed the way for 20 years.
  2. The easement is extinguished by 20 years' non-enjoyment. Correct answer.
  3. The easement is suspended during non-use and revives when A resumes.
  4. The easement continues, because non-use cannot affect a granted easement.

Explanation

Section 47 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882, extinguishes an easement by non-enjoyment for twenty years. The period is counted from the date of cessation, and the easement does not revive merely because the dominant owner resumes use. Obstruction by the servient owner is not required.

Question 37Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A drives above the speed limit. B, a pedestrian, suddenly steps onto the road without looking, and A's car hits B. A could have avoided the collision if he had been driving at the speed limit. In a claim by B against A in tort, which statement best reflects the law?

  1. A is liable in full, because B's negligence is irrelevant once A was also negligent.
  2. B's damages are reduced to the extent his own negligence contributed. Correct answer.
  3. A is liable only if B's negligence was the sole cause of the injury.
  4. B's claim fails entirely because B's own negligence contributed to the injury.

Explanation

Contributory negligence is not a complete defence in Indian tort law; the claimant's damages are reduced according to the extent of his own contribution. A remains liable for his negligent speeding. The reduction is assessed by apportionment, not by denying the claim altogether.

Question 38Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A mortgages his land to B for ₹5,00,000 for three years. The deed provides that on default in repayment at the end of three years, the land shall become B's absolute property. A fails to pay on the due date, and B refuses A's tender made two months later. Which statement is correct?

  1. A may redeem after the due date; the absolute-ownership clause is void. Correct answer.
  2. A loses the right of redemption because he defaulted on the due date.
  3. B becomes absolute owner because the deed provides for it on default.
  4. A may redeem only by paying the additional penalty stipulated in the deed.

Explanation

Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, gives the mortgagor a right to redeem after the mortgage money becomes due. A condition that makes the mortgagee absolute owner on default is a clog on the equity of redemption and is void. A may redeem on payment even after the due date.

Question 39Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A agrees in writing to sell his house to B for ₹20,00,000. B pays the price, takes possession, and has always been ready and willing to execute the sale deed, but the deed is not registered. A later refuses to execute the deed and sues to recover possession. Which defence, if any, is available to B under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882?

  1. B has no defence because an unregistered agreement is wholly inadmissible.
  2. B can succeed only if he proves that the agreement was registered.
  3. B becomes full owner because payment and possession complete the sale.
  4. B may resist A's claim and remain in possession without title. Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, protects a transferee who has a written contract, has paid consideration, has taken possession, and is willing to perform. It operates as a shield against the transferor's claim for possession; it does not confer title. Registration is not required for the defence, though it affects admissibility.

Question 40Civil Law - Substantive (Contract, Torts, Property, Specific Relief, Easements)

A agrees to sell land to B for ₹50,00,000, with completion on 1 August. B pays ₹5,00,000 earnest money but fails to tender the balance on 1 August. On 5 August B writes that he is ready to complete, but A has already sold the land to C. In B's suit for specific performance, which requirement is decisive under Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963?

  1. B need only deposit the balance in court after filing the suit.
  2. B must prove continuous readiness and willingness from the date of the contract. Correct answer.
  3. B need only prove A's later sale to C, because a subsequent sale is itself sufficient.
  4. B must prove that A had notice of B's readiness before 1 August.

Explanation

Section 16(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, requires the plaintiff to aver and prove that he has been ready and willing to perform his part of the contract continuously. Readiness at the time of suit is not enough if he defaulted earlier. A later sale by the vendor does not excuse the purchaser's own default.

Question 41Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

Under the Penal Code, the right of private defence of the body extends to the voluntary causing of death in which of the following situations?

  1. An assault with the intention of committing rape Correct answer.
  2. An assault with the intention of wrongfully restraining a person
  3. An assault with the intention of causing simple hurt
  4. An assault committed in the course of a sudden quarrel

Explanation

Section 100 of the Penal Code (Section 38 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) enumerates the situations in which the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death, and an assault with the intention of committing rape is one of them, along with assault with intent to gratify unnatural lust, kidnapping or abduction, and wrongful confinement under apprehension of death or grievous hurt. Where the assault is of a lesser kind, such as simple hurt, wrongful restraint or an attack in a sudden quarrel, the defender must keep the force proportionate under Section 101 (Section 39 BNS) and may not deliberately kill.

Question 42Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

Which of the following correctly distinguishes extortion from theft under the Penal Code?

  1. Extortion requires an assembly of five or more persons, whereas theft may be committed by a single person
  2. Extortion is confined to movable property, whereas theft may also relate to immovable property of any kind
  3. Theft is committed only by night, whereas extortion may be committed at any hour of the day or night
  4. In extortion the victim delivers the property under fear, whereas in theft it is taken without consent Correct answer.

Explanation

Theft under Section 378 (Section 303 BNS) consists in dishonestly taking movable property out of the possession of another person without that person's consent. Extortion under Section 383 (Section 308 BNS) is complete when the offender dishonestly induces a person, by putting him in fear of injury, to deliver property, so that the delivery is a vitiated consent rather than a taking. Both may be committed by one person, and extortion is not confined to movable property, which makes the mode of acquisition the real distinction.

Question 43Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

A and B agree to murder C, but before any act is done in pursuance of the plan they abandon it. Under the Penal Code their agreement amounts to:

  1. no offence, because no act was done in pursuance of the agreement
  2. criminal conspiracy, because the agreement itself is the offence Correct answer.
  3. abetment of murder, because each of them instigated the other
  4. an attempt to murder, because the agreement is itself the first step towards it

Explanation

Section 120A (Section 61 BNS) defines criminal conspiracy as an agreement between two or more persons to do an illegal act or to do a lawful act by illegal means. Where the agreement is to commit an offence, the offence of conspiracy is complete on the making of the agreement and no overt act is necessary, and subsequent abandonment of the plan is no defence. The agreement here is to commit murder, so conspiracy is made out.

Question 44Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

Five persons assemble with the common object of beating a man so as to compel him to give up possession of land. One of them, acting in prosecution of that common object, causes grievous hurt. Under the Penal Code the remaining members are:

  1. not liable, since none of them caused the grievous hurt
  2. liable only if they shared the intention to cause grievous hurt
  3. liable for the offence committed in prosecution of the common object Correct answer.
  4. liable for abetment only, because one person caused the injury

Explanation

Section 149 (Section 190 BNS) makes every member of an unlawful assembly liable for an offence committed by any member in prosecution of the common object of the assembly, or in circumstances which the members knew to be likely. The prosecution need not prove that each accused personally caused the injury or entertained the specific intention. Beating a person to compel surrender of possession supplies an unlawful common object, so all five are constructively liable.

Question 45Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

A, knowing that B suffers from a disease which makes even a slight blow fatal, gives B a blow on the chest intending only slight hurt. B dies from the blow. What offence has A committed?

  1. causing hurt only, because the injury inflicted was slight in nature
  2. grievous hurt, because the injury actually resulted in death
  3. culpable homicide not amounting to murder, because death was not intended
  4. murder, because A knew that the injury was likely to cause death Correct answer.

Explanation

Section 300 'secondly' (Section 101 BNS) covers an act done with the intention of causing bodily injury which the offender knows to be likely to cause the death of the person harmed. Where the offender knows of the victim's diseased condition and still strikes him, that knowledge supplies the mens rea even though death was not desired and the blow was slight. Illustration (b) to Section 300 is to the same effect.

Question 46Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

A instigates B to murder C. B refuses to act and no murder is committed. Under the Penal Code, A is:

  1. punishable for abetment of murder, because instigation is itself abetment Correct answer.
  2. not punishable, because B refused and no offence was ultimately committed
  3. punishable only for criminal intimidation, because no hurt was caused
  4. punishable for attempt to murder, because A intended to cause death

Explanation

Abetment by instigation under Section 107 (Section 45 BNS) is complete when the instigation is made, whether or not the person instigated acts upon it. Where the offence abetted is punishable with death or imprisonment for life and is not committed, Section 115 (Section 47 BNS) prescribes punishment extending to seven years, and to fourteen years where the abettor does some act in pursuance of the instigation. A's instigation of murder therefore attracts liability.

Question 47Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

Which of the following is punishable as an attempt under the Penal Code?

  1. Agreeing with a friend to beat a person on a later date
  2. Purchasing a knife with the intention of causing hurt to an enemy
  3. Firing a pistol at a sleeping person, the shot missing him Correct answer.
  4. Expressing a desire to kill a person during the course of a quarrel

Explanation

An attempt requires an act done with the intention of committing an offence which is carried beyond mere preparation and is proximate to the completed offence. Buying a weapon or fixing a future plan remains preparation and is ordinarily not punishable. Firing at a sleeping person would have caused death but for the miss, so it is an attempt to murder punishable under Section 307 (Section 109 BNS).

Question 48Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

A person is exempted from criminal liability under the Penal Code on the ground of unsoundness of mind if, at the time of doing the act:

  1. he did not know the nature of the act or that it was wrong Correct answer.
  2. several members of his family had earlier suffered from mental disorder
  3. he acted under an irresistible impulse which he was unable to control at the time
  4. he was diagnosed after the act with a serious mental illness

Explanation

Section 84 (Section 22 BNS) protects a person who, at the time of doing the act, is by reason of unsoundness of mind incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that it is wrong or contrary to law. The test is legal insanity judged at the moment of the act, not medical insanity or a later diagnosis, and the burden of establishing the exception lies on the accused. An irresistible impulse falling short of this cognitive incapacity is not enough.

Question 49Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

A enters a house through an open front door at 10 p.m. with intent to commit theft and conceals himself behind a curtain. Under the Penal Code his offence is:

  1. theft only, because his intention was to commit theft of movable property
  2. criminal trespass only, because the door was open and no force was used
  3. house-breaking by night, because he entered the house with a criminal intention
  4. lurking house-trespass by night, because he concealed himself with intent to offend Correct answer.

Explanation

House-breaking under Section 445 (Section 334 BNS) requires entry into a building by one of the six specified means, such as a passage not intended for human entry, an opening not intended for entrance, or by unlocking a lock. Entry through an open door is therefore not house-breaking. Concealment inside with intent to commit an offence is lurking house-trespass under Section 443, and it becomes lurking house-trespass by night under Section 444 (Sections 332 and 333 BNS).

Question 50Criminal Law - Substantive (Penal Code / BNS equivalents, General Exceptions, Offences)

Four persons conjointly commit robbery of a traveller, while a fifth keeps watch at a distance to warn them of the approach of the police. Under the Penal Code the offence is:

  1. extortion, because the traveller was put in fear of instant hurt
  2. dacoity, because five persons were concerned in committing the robbery Correct answer.
  3. robbery only, because the robbery was physically committed by four persons
  4. criminal conspiracy only, because the fifth person did not participate

Explanation

Under Section 391 (Section 310 BNS), when five or more persons conjointly commit or attempt to commit a robbery, every person so concerned is guilty of dacoity. The person keeping watch is concerned in the commission and is counted among the five, even though he did not physically take the property. Dacoity is thus the aggravated form of robbery involving an assembly of five persons.