MCQOPTIONS

Explore topic-wise MCQs in Testing Subject.

This section includes 657 Mcqs, each offering curated multiple-choice questions to sharpen your Testing Subject knowledge and support exam preparation. Choose a topic below to get started.

1.	Legal Principle : A contract becomes void if the performance of the same becomes impossible under the circumstances. Facts of the Problem : Ravi offers to buy the horse of Arjun for a price of Rs. 10 lakhs. Arjun, not knowing that the horse is already dead, agrees to the contract. Later the truth about the death of the hose is discovered. Is the contract valid?
A.	The contract is valid and the money must be paid for the horse.
B.	The contract is void as the performance of the same is impossible.
C.	The contract is void as the price of the horse is very high.
D.	The contract is valid and Arjun must deliver another horse to Ravi for the price.
Answer» C. The contract is void as the price of the horse is very high.

2.	Legal Principle : With the counter proposal made by the party, the original offer ceases to exist. Facts of the Problem : Badal offered to sell his car to Pranav at the price of Rs. 3 lakhs. Pranav replies that he is ready to buy the car at Rs. 2.5 lakhs only. Badal refuses to sell at that price. Later, Pranav goes to Badal with Rs. 3 lakhs to buy the car. Is the offer to Rs. 3 lakhs still valid?
A.	The offer of Rs. 3 lakhs is not valid with a counter offer of Pranav being made.
B.	The offer of Rs. 3 lakhs still stands for Pranav to buy the car.
C.	The offer stands as it was made by owner of the car i.e. Badal himself.
D.	The offer can be renegotiated by the buyer and seller.
Answer» B. The offer of Rs. 3 lakhs still stands for Pranav to buy the car.

3.	Legal Principle : Any contract made for an unlawful consideration is void in law. Facts of the Problem : Gagan enters into a contract with Nikhil to murder his wife, Preity for a sum of Rs. 5 lakhs. Gagan agrees to pay the amount to Nikhil in return of the murder. Is it a valid contract?
A.	The contract is voidable at the option of Nikhil due to the risk involved in it.
B.	The contract is void due to unlawful consideration.
C.	The contract is valid and Nikhil must perform the act of murdering Preity.
D.	The contract is uncertain as the manner of murdering Preity is not specified in it.
Answer» C. The contract is valid and Nikhil must perform the act of murdering Preity.

4.	Legal Principle : A contract enters into by the use of misrepresentation is voidable at the option of the other party. Facts of the Problem : Lalit with an intention to deceive Rahul into buying his cement factory, falsely stated that his factory is capable of producing 2,000 kg of cement per day. However, in reality, the factory only has a production capacity of 500 kg/ day. Rahul gets induced and agrees to buy the factory. Is it a valid contract?
A.	The contract is valid one and Rahul must buy the factory.
B.	The contract is voidable at the option of Rahul due to misrepresentation by Lalit.
C.	The contract is void due to false claims made by Lalit in realtion to his factory.
D.	The price of the contract could be reduced to commensurate with the reduced production capacity of the factory.
Answer» C. The contract is void due to false claims made by Lalit in realtion to his factory.

5.	Legal Principle : The notice for auction or sale of goods is only an invitation to offer, and not an offer in itself under the law of contract. Facts of the Problem : Uday puts up an advertisement in front of his house of selling the house at the price of Rs. 50 lakhs. Saif sees that advertisement and goes to Uday with the money to buy the house. Uday refuses to sell the house to Saif. Saif sues Uday for the breach of the contract. Decide?
A.	Uday must sell his house to Saif at the advertised price.
B.	Saif would be able to get damages from Uday for the breach of contract.
C.	No legal remedy is available to Saif as the advertisement for the sale of the house was a mere invitation to offer.
D.	The court could decide the right price for the sale of the house by Uday.
Answer» D. The court could decide the right price for the sale of the house by Uday.

6.	Legal Principle : A contract to do an impossible act is void ab initio. Facts of the Problem :Tarun enters into a contract with Karan to make his dead pet dog alive again through the use of magic. Karan agrees to pay him Rs. 20,000 for the act. Later, when Tarun tries to bring back the dog to life, Karan refuses to pay the money to him. Tarun sues Karan for damages due to non-payment of the agreed consideration by him. Decide the case?
A.	The court would direct Karan to pay the agreed amount to Tarun.
B.	The suit would fail as the contract was void ab initio.
C.	The court would direct Karan to only pay compensation to Tarun for rescinding the contract.
D.	The court would allow Tarun to perform his magic procedure to bring back the deade dog to life.
Answer» C. The court would direct Karan to only pay compensation to Tarun for rescinding the contract.

7.	Legal Principle : The acceptance of an agreement by both the parties must be absolute and unqualified in order to constitute a valid contract. Facts of the Problem : Rahul proposes to sell Parul two quintals of kerosene at the cost of Rs. 40/litre. Parul did not convey her acceptance, but says that she would think about it. Unable to wait for Parul to accept the contract, Rahul sells the kerosene to someone else. Parul gets furious after learning about the sale of the kerosene to someone else by Rahul. Parul files a suit for damages against Rahul for the dishonouring of the contract?
A.	Parul would get damages from Rahul for the dishonouring of the contract.
B.	Parul would not get any relief as the acceptance of Parul to the contract was not absolute.
C.	The contract between Rahul and Parul was against public policy as kerosene could not be sold/purchased in open market.
D.	The court would direct Rahul to sell the specified quantity of kerosene to Parul.
Answer» C. The contract between Rahul and Parul was against public policy as kerosene could not be sold/purchased in open market.

8.	Legal Principle : A contract which is made to restraint the legal proceedings is void under the law. Facts of the Problem :Raj is a leading barrister of the city. His friend Nitin enters into a contract with him that he would not in represent Jatin in any law suit for the next one year. After two months, Raj represents Jatin in a civil suit. Nitin sues Raj for the breach of the contract. What would be the legal outcome of the suit against Raj?
A.	The suit would grant relief to Nitin as Raj has violated the terms of the contract.
B.	The suit would award compensation to Nitin and would direct Raj to pay the amount.
C.	The suit would fail as the contract being made to restraint the legal proceedings is void.
D.	The suit would fail as Raj is a barrister and he has the fundamental right to practise trade or profession without any legal restrictions.
Answer» D. The suit would fail as Raj is a barrister and he has the fundamental right to practise trade or profession without any legal restrictions.

9.	Legal Principle : A contract whose consideration is uncertain, or incapable of being made certain is void in law. Facts of the Problem : Amit has a stable of racing horses. He owns many horses of various exotic as well as indigenous breeds. He agrees to sell a horse of exotic breed for a price of Rs. 5 lakh to Arun. Arun also agrees to pay the price for the horse, but when the time of delivery of the horse came, there is confusion as regards which horse is to be given under the contract. A case is filed in the civil court for the delivery of the horse by Arun. What would be the outcome of the suit?
A.	The court would order Amit to give his best horse of the exotic breed to Arun under the contract.
B.	The court would allow Arun to choose which horse he wants to purchase from the horses of the exotic breeds.
C.	The court would order Amit to give any random horse to Arun.
D.	The court would term the contract void due to uncertainty as to the consideration of the contract.
Answer» E.

10.	Legal Principle : A contract with a minor would be void if the other party knew about the minority. Facts of the Problem : Hitesh is a leading seller of the computer hardware items in the city. His sixteen years old son has Rohan as his best friend. Rohan is also of the same age. Hitesh knowing the age of Rohan entered into a contract with him for a set of laptops for a sum of Rs. 20 lakhs to him. When Hitesh sent the consignment of the laptops, Rohan refused to take them and dishonoured the contract. Hitesh sues Rohan for the damages suffered by him. Decide the legal outcome of the situation?
A.	Hitesh would be able to get compensation for the damages from Rohan.
B.	Hitesh would not be able to get the damages, but can force Rohan to buy the laptops from him.
C.	Hitesh would not be able to get the damages as the contract is void.
D.	The court could grant exemplary damages to Hitesh.
Answer» D. The court could grant exemplary damages to Hitesh.

11.	Legal Principle : An agreement, the meaning of which is not certain, or capable of being made certain, is void. Factual Situation : Mohan offered to sell land to Nimrat at 80 lakhs. Nimrat replied accepting the offer and enclosing 30 lakhs and promising to pay the balance amount by monthly installments of 50000 each. Since Nimrat accepted the offer subject to making full payments in installments, decide as a judge whether there is a valid contract?
A.	Valid contract.
B.	Invalid contract.
C.	Voidable at option of Mohan.
D.	Misrepresentation of Facts in contract.
Answer» C. Voidable at option of Mohan.

12.	Legal Principle : Communication of offer and acceptance is must for a valid contract. Factual Situation :A proposes by speed post, to sell a watch to B at a definite price. A revokes his proposal by email after 6 hours to B. Issue :Whether the revocation of an offer is valid? Decision :
A.	Yes, revocation of offer is valid.
B.	Revocation of offer is not valid because it is not complete.
C.	Neither (a) nor (b).
D.	Revocation of offer is not accepted through two different means.
Answer» B. Revocation of offer is not valid because it is not complete.

13.	Legal Principle : 'When, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee or, any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or abstinence or promise, is called a consideration for the promise'. Factual Situation : A doctor gave up his lucrative practice in the city and served as manager of an ashram at the Ashram’s request in lieu of which the manager of the ashram subsequently promised a monthly remuneration. Issue : What is the nature of contract? Decision :
A.	There was a valid contract as there is a good consideration.
B.	Such vague promises do not result into contract.
C.	Contract is voidable at the option of land owner.
D.	Contract is void ab intio
Answer» B. Such vague promises do not result into contract.

14.	Legal Principle : A counter offer doesn't give rise to contractual binding. Factual Situation : Aman offered to sell a Rolls Royce for $1,500 to Xiaomi who said he would give $800. Aman refused and Xiaomi who then said he would give $1,500. Aman declined to adhere to his original offer and Xiaomi tried to obtain specific performance in the court. Decide as a judge? Issue : Is there a valid contract between Aman and Xiaomi? Decision:
A.	There is not valid contract as Xiaomi's offer to pay $1500 is a refusal of the offer.
B.	There is a valid contract and Aman is liable for specific performance.
C.	It is voidable contract at the option of Xiaomi.
D.	The contract is void ab intio.
Answer» C. It is voidable contract at the option of Xiaomi.

15.	Legal Principle : A contract requires a proposal and an acceptance of the proposal. It is necessary to make a binding contract, not only that the pro¬posal be accepted, but also that the acceptance is notified to the proposer. Factual Situation : Diu offered to purchase a home owned by Pawan for 20,00,000. He wrote to Pawan's agent ask¬ing whether his offer was accepted. He also added that he was ready to accept any higher price if found reasonable. The agent of pawan Shyam sunder replied, 'would not accept less than 30,00,000'. Diu accepted this and brought a suit in a local court for specific performance. Issue : Is Pawan liable for specific performance? Decision:
A.	Pawan is liable for the specific performance of the contract entered into Diu and Pawan.
B.	Pawan is not liable.
C.	The contract is void ab intio.
D.	The contract is voidable.
Answer» C. The contract is void ab intio.

Previous Next