व्यावसायिक कानुन – Business & Corporate Law MCQ

व्यावसायिक कानुन: प्रश्न र उत्तर

सही लागेको विकल्पमा थिच्नुहोस्। सही भए हरियो, गलत भए रातो देखिन्छ; ३ सेकेन्डपछि सही उत्तर र व्याख्या देखिन्छ।

सही: ० / ०

291. According to Derry v Peek, fraud in a statement requires that the statement was made:

     कKnowingly, without belief in its truth, or recklessly खNegligently but honestly गInnocently with reasonable grounds घOnly in writing
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।

292. A contract where one party is in a position to dominate the will of the other (e.g. doctor and patient) and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage is affected by:

     कCoercion खFraud गBilateral mistake घUndue influence
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।

293. Consent obtained by threatening to commit an act forbidden by the penal law, or by unlawfully detaining property, is said to be obtained by:

     कCoercion खUndue influence गMisrepresentation घMistake
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।

294. In Nash v Inman, a minor bought eleven fancy waistcoats while already adequately supplied with clothes. The tailor's claim failed because:

     कThe goods were not necessaries in the minor's circumstances खMinors are never liable for any goods गThere was no written contract घThe price was unreasonable
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।

295. The equitable doctrine applied in Central London Property Trust v High Trees House, which prevents a promisor from going back on a promise relied on by the other party, is:

     कPromissory estoppel खPrivity of contract गCaveat emptor घRes judicata
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।

296. Under the common law rule in Pinnel's case (affirmed in Foakes v Beer), payment of a smaller sum on the due date in satisfaction of a larger debt:

     कAlways discharges the whole debt खDischarges the debt only if paid in cash गDoes not discharge the whole debt घMakes the creditor liable for damages
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।

297. In Stilk v Myrick, sailors were promised extra wages for working a ship home after two crew members deserted. The promise was unenforceable because:

     कThe captain lacked capacity खThe promise was made under coercion by the sailors गPerforming an existing contractual duty is not good consideration घThe voyage became impossible
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।

298. The rule in Tweddle v Atkinson, that a person who is not a party to a contract cannot sue on it, is known as the doctrine of:

     कPromissory estoppel खFrustration गQuantum meruit घPrivity of contract
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।

299. A sells his car worth Rs 15 lakh to B for Rs 2 lakh with free consent. Regarding consideration, the agreement is:

     कVoid for inadequate consideration खVoidable at A's option गIllegal घValid, because consideration need not be adequate
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।

300. In Balfour v Balfour, a husband's promise to pay his wife a monthly allowance was not enforceable because:

     कDomestic agreements are presumed not to be intended to create legal relations खThe wife was a minor गThere was no written agreement घThe amount was not fixed
     💬 टिप्पणी / गल्ती रिपोर्ट (०)

     छलफल / प्रश्न उत्तरमा गल्ती छ

     पठाउनुहोस्

     टिप्पणी जाँचपछि मात्र देखिन्छ।