CLAT UG question bank

Legal Reasoning MCQs for CLAT UG, Page 12

CLAT UG Legal Reasoning questions 263-286 of 310, with answer keys and explanations covering self-contained legal principles, factual application, changes in outcome, rights, duties, liability, and remedies.

310 questions61 topics263-286 on this page
Start adaptive practiceBrowse CLAT UG

Coverage

Topics in this subject

Practice passage-based CLAT UG questions with answers for English, current affairs, legal reasoning, logical reasoning, and quantitative techniques.

  • Agency and Authority10
  • Agreements in Restraint of Trade5
  • Anticipatory Breach of Contract5
  • Appropriation of Payments5
  • Assault and Battery5
  • Assignment of Contractual Rights5
  • Authority of an Agent and Ratification5
  • Bailment and Duty of Care5
  • Breach of Condition and Warranty5
  • Caveat Emptor and Quality of Goods5
  • Coercion in Contracts5
  • Communication and Revocation of Proposals5
  • Contingent Contracts5
  • Contract of Guarantee and Surety5
  • Contract of Indemnity5
  • Contractual Misrepresentation5
  • Contributory Negligence and Apportionment5
  • Defamation and Defences5
  • Defamation and Responsible Publication5
  • Doctrine of Election in Property Transfers5
  • Doctrine of Part Performance5
  • False Imprisonment5
  • Fraud and Contractual Consent5
  • Frustration of Contract5
  • Fundamental Rights and Proportionality5
  • Guarantee Obtained by Misrepresentation5
  • Informed Consent to Medical Treatment5
  • Intervening Acts and Causation5
  • Joint Promisors and Contribution5
  • Malicious Prosecution5
  • Mistake and Restitution5
  • Necessaries Supplied to an Incapable Person5
  • Negligence and Standard of Care5
  • Non-Gratuitous Acts and Restitution5
  • Novation and Alteration of Contract5
  • Occupier Liability to Visitors5
  • Offer, Acceptance, and Revocation5
  • Pledge and Rights of the Pawnee5
  • Preparation and Criminal Attempt5
  • Private Defence of the Person5
  • Private Necessity and Property Damage5
  • Privity and Third-Party Rights5
  • Promissory Estoppel and Public Interest5
  • Public Nuisance and Special Damage5
  • Remission and Waiver of Contractual Performance5
  • Remoteness of Contractual Damages5
  • Res Ipsa Loquitur5
  • Right of Private Defence5
  • Rights and Duties of a Finder of Goods5
  • Rights of an Unpaid Seller5
  • Sale and Agreement to Sell5
  • Sale by a Non-Owner5
  • Sale by Sample and Description5
  • Stipulated Damages and Reasonable Compensation5
  • Strict Liability and Escape5
  • Time as the Essence of Contract5
  • Trespass to Goods and Conversion5
  • Trespass to Land and Necessity5
  • Undue Influence in Contracts5
  • Unlawful Object and Severability5
  • Vicarious Liability5
Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

An agreement restraining a person from exercising a lawful profession, trade, or business is void to the extent of the restraint, unless it falls within a stated exception. One exception applies when a seller of the goodwill of a business agrees with the buyer not to carry on a similar business within reasonable local limits, so long as the buyer carries on that business there. A restraint wider than reasonably necessary for the protected interest is not saved merely because the parties called it reasonable. A restriction during employment that requires an employee to work exclusively for the employer may protect the performance of the current contract. A restriction operating after employment ends is ordinarily a restraint of trade unless an exception applies. Apply only these principles.

Question 263MediumAgreements in Restraint of Trade

The parties label a worldwide restraint "reasonable", although it is far wider than needed. What follows?

  1. A

    The label is conclusive.

  2. B

    Every worldwide restraint is an exception.

  3. C

    The label alone does not save an excessive restraint.

  4. D

    The protected interest becomes irrelevant.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. The label alone does not save an excessive restraint.

C follows from the third paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 27, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 264HardAgreements in Restraint of Trade

E agrees to work exclusively for X during a one-year employment contract. The restriction protects performance of that current contract. Is it necessarily void?

  1. A

    Yes, all exclusivity is void.

  2. B

    Yes, because employment never matters.

  3. C

    Only if E receives salary

  4. D

    No, a current-employment restriction may be valid under the stated principle.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. No, a current-employment restriction may be valid under the stated principle.

D applies the final paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 27, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 265MediumAgreements in Restraint of Trade

After employment ends, E is barred from every similar job for ten years, and no exception applies. What is the result?

  1. A

    The post-employment restraint is ordinarily void.

  2. B

    It is automatically valid.

  3. C

    It becomes a sale of goodwill.

  4. D

    It binds only because it is written.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. The post-employment restraint is ordinarily void.

A follows from the post-employment rule.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 27, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

Communication of a proposal is complete when it comes to the knowledge of the person to whom it is made. Communication of acceptance is complete against the proposer when it is put into transmission beyond the acceptor's control. It is complete against the acceptor when it comes to the proposer's knowledge. A proposal may be revoked before communication of acceptance is complete against the proposer, but not afterwards. An acceptance may be revoked before communication of acceptance is complete against the acceptor. The revocation must reach the proposer before the acceptance itself comes to the proposer's knowledge. Apply only these principles.

Question 266MediumCommunication and Revocation of Proposals

P sends an offer by email, but O has not received or read it due to a delivery failure. Is communication of the proposal complete?

  1. A

    Yes, dispatch alone is enough.

  2. B

    No, it has not come to O's knowledge.

  3. C

    Only if P repeats it orally

  4. D

    Yes, because P intended to send it.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. No, it has not come to O's knowledge.

B applies the first paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 27, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 267HardCommunication and Revocation of Proposals

O properly posts an acceptance beyond O's control. When is acceptance complete against P?

  1. A

    When P later replies

  2. B

    When O first considers accepting

  3. C

    When the acceptance is put into transmission beyond O's control

  4. D

    Only when both parties meet

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. When the acceptance is put into transmission beyond O's control

C follows from the second paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 27, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 268MediumCommunication and Revocation of Proposals

When is communication of acceptance complete against O, the acceptor?

  1. A

    At the time the proposal was made

  2. B

    When O writes a draft

  3. C

    When the letter enters a postbox

  4. D

    When the acceptance comes to P's knowledge

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. When the acceptance comes to P's knowledge

D applies the second paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 27, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 269HardCommunication and Revocation of Proposals

P attempts to revoke after O has put the acceptance beyond O's control. Is the proposal validly revoked?

  1. A

    No, acceptance was already complete against P.

  2. B

    Yes, until P reads the acceptance.

  3. C

    Yes, proposals can always be revoked.

  4. D

    Only if O agrees later

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. No, acceptance was already complete against P.

A applies the third paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 27, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 270HardCommunication and Revocation of Proposals

O sends a faster revocation that reaches P before O's acceptance reaches P. Is the acceptance effectively revoked?

  1. A

    No, acceptance can never be revoked.

  2. B

    Yes, the revocation reached P before acceptance was complete against O.

  3. C

    Only if P had already performed

  4. D

    No, because both messages were written.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Yes, the revocation reached P before acceptance was complete against O.

B applies the final paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 27, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

A promisee may dispense with or remit, wholly or in part, the performance promised by the promisor. The promisee may also extend the time for performance. The promisee may accept any satisfaction considered appropriate instead of the original performance. Under these principles, fresh consideration from the promisor is not required for a valid remission. A remission must be made by the person entitled to performance or by an authorised representative. A stranger cannot unilaterally release the promisor from the debt. Once a valid remission is made and acted upon, the promisee cannot demand the remitted portion merely because the original promise was larger. Apply only these principles.

Question 271MediumRemission and Waiver of Contractual Performance

D owes C Rs 1 lakh. C validly agrees to accept Rs 80,000 in full satisfaction. Is D discharged after payment?

  1. A

    Yes, C may accept lesser satisfaction.

  2. B

    No, the original amount can never change.

  3. C

    Only if a stranger approves

  4. D

    Only after litigation

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. Yes, C may accept lesser satisfaction.

A applies the remission rule.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 272HardRemission and Waiver of Contractual Performance

C gives D an additional month to perform. Is such an extension permitted?

  1. A

    No, time can never be extended.

  2. B

    Yes, the promisee may extend time for performance.

  3. C

    Only if D doubles performance

  4. D

    Only by a stranger.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. Yes, the promisee may extend time for performance.

B follows from the first paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 273MediumRemission and Waiver of Contractual Performance

D gives no fresh consideration for C's valid remission. Does that fact alone invalidate it?

  1. A

    Yes, in every case.

  2. B

    Only if payment is prompt

  3. C

    No, fresh consideration is not required under the passage.

  4. D

    Yes, unless D is a minor.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. No, fresh consideration is not required under the passage.

C applies the second paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 274HardRemission and Waiver of Contractual Performance

Without C's authority, S tells D that C's debt is released. Is D discharged?

  1. A

    Yes, any person may release a debt.

  2. B

    Yes, if S is confident.

  3. C

    Only if D prefers S's statement

  4. D

    No, S is neither the promisee nor an authorised representative.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. No, S is neither the promisee nor an authorised representative.

D applies the authority requirement.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 275MediumRemission and Waiver of Contractual Performance

After validly accepting reduced satisfaction, may C later demand the remitted balance merely because the original debt was higher?

  1. A

    No, the valid remission bars that demand.

  2. B

    Yes, automatically.

  3. C

    Only if C forgot the agreement

  4. D

    Yes, because remission has no effect.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. No, the valid remission bars that demand.

A follows from the final paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

The consideration or object of an agreement is unlawful if it is forbidden by law, defeats the provisions of law, is fraudulent, involves injury to another, or is treated as immoral or opposed to public policy. An agreement with an unlawful object is void. The parties' private belief that the object is acceptable does not make it lawful. Where legal and illegal promises are distinct and can be separated, the legal part may survive. If the lawful and unlawful parts are inseparable, the whole agreement is void. A court considers the substance and purpose of the transaction, not merely the label chosen by the parties. Apply only these principles.

Question 276MediumUnlawful Object and Severability

P promises to pay A for doing an act expressly forbidden by law. Is the object lawful?

  1. A

    Yes, because payment is promised.

  2. B

    No, an act forbidden by law is an unlawful object.

  3. C

    Only if A acts quickly

  4. D

    Yes, if both parties agree.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. No, an act forbidden by law is an unlawful object.

B applies the first paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 277HardUnlawful Object and Severability

P and A honestly believe their prohibited purpose is acceptable. Does their belief validate the agreement?

  1. A

    Yes, honesty always validates an object.

  2. B

    Only if the agreement is oral

  3. C

    No, private belief does not convert an unlawful object into a lawful one.

  4. D

    Yes, if no court knows.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. No, private belief does not convert an unlawful object into a lawful one.

C follows from the second paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 278MediumUnlawful Object and Severability

A contract contains one lawful promise and one distinct unlawful promise that can be separated. What may follow?

  1. A

    Both promises must always survive.

  2. B

    The unlawful promise becomes lawful.

  3. C

    The whole contract must always fail.

  4. D

    The lawful part may survive if it is genuinely separable.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. The lawful part may survive if it is genuinely separable.

D applies the severability rule.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 279HardUnlawful Object and Severability

The lawful and unlawful parts form one indivisible exchange. What is the result?

  1. A

    The whole agreement is void.

  2. B

    Only the label is void.

  3. C

    Both parts are enforceable.

  4. D

    The unlawful purpose is ignored.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. The whole agreement is void.

A follows from the third paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 280MediumUnlawful Object and Severability

Parties label payment for a prohibited act as a "consulting fee". What should determine legality?

  1. A

    The title alone

  2. B

    The transaction's real substance and purpose

  3. C

    The length of the document

  4. D

    The colour of the receipt

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. The transaction's real substance and purpose

B applies the final paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 28, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

When a contract names a sum payable on breach, the injured party may receive reasonable compensation not exceeding the named sum. The named amount is a ceiling, not an automatic award. A court considers the loss, the purpose of the clause, and whether the sum is a genuine estimate or an extravagant punishment. Where actual loss is difficult to prove, reasonable compensation may still be awarded if breach and likely injury are established. The claimant cannot recover for a loss that did not arise merely because a large figure appears in the contract. The injured party must take reasonable steps to reduce avoidable loss. Apply only these principles.

Question 281MediumStipulated Damages and Reasonable Compensation

A contract names Rs 2 lakh for breach. Can reasonable compensation exceed Rs 2 lakh under the passage?

  1. A

    No, the named sum is the ceiling.

  2. B

    Yes, without limit.

  3. C

    Only if no breach occurs

  4. D

    Yes, whenever requested.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. No, the named sum is the ceiling.

A follows from the first paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 29, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 282HardStipulated Damages and Reasonable Compensation

B breaches a contract naming Rs 5 lakh. Must the court automatically award the full sum?

  1. A

    Yes, every named sum is automatic.

  2. B

    No, the court awards reasonable compensation within the ceiling.

  3. C

    Only if B apologises

  4. D

    Yes, even without likely injury.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. No, the court awards reasonable compensation within the ceiling.

B applies the second paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 29, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 283MediumStipulated Damages and Reasonable Compensation

Actual loss is difficult to calculate, but breach and likely injury are shown. Is compensation necessarily barred?

  1. A

    Yes, exact proof is always essential.

  2. B

    Only if the clause is oral

  3. C

    No, reasonable compensation may still be awarded.

  4. D

    Yes, unless the named sum is zero.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: C. No, reasonable compensation may still be awarded.

C follows from the third paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 29, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 284HardStipulated Damages and Reasonable Compensation

A sum is extravagant and designed only to punish, while the actual risk is minor. What should the court do?

  1. A

    Award the full sum automatically.

  2. B

    Ignore whether breach occurred.

  3. C

    Treat punishment as conclusive.

  4. D

    Assess reasonable compensation rather than mechanically award the extravagant sum.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: D. Assess reasonable compensation rather than mechanically award the extravagant sum.

D applies the stated standard.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 29, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Question 285MediumStipulated Damages and Reasonable Compensation

After breach, C unreasonably allows avoidable loss to grow. May this affect recovery?

  1. A

    Yes, C must reasonably reduce avoidable loss.

  2. B

    No, mitigation is irrelevant.

  3. C

    Only if B benefits

  4. D

    No, because every loss is fixed.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: A. Yes, C must reasonably reduce avoidable loss.

A applies the final paragraph.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 29, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Passage or principleOriginal legal principle and fact scenarios

Ordinarily, only a party to a contract may enforce it. A person who merely benefits from a promise but is not a party cannot sue on the contract. A beneficiary may enforce where a recognised exception applies, including a trust created in the beneficiary's favour or a valid assignment of a contractual right. An assignment transfers the specified right to the assignee but does not automatically transfer personal obligations that depend on the original party's skill or confidence. A contract cannot impose a burden on a stranger without that person's consent. Apply only these principles.

Question 286MediumPrivity and Third-Party Rights

P and A contract to confer a benefit on T, who is not a party and falls under no exception. May T ordinarily sue on the contract?

  1. A

    Yes, every beneficiary may sue.

  2. B

    No, the rule of privity bars T.

  3. C

    Only if T dislikes the benefit

  4. D

    Yes, because consent is irrelevant.

View answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. No, the rule of privity bars T.

B applies the general rule.

Source note: Original LexMentor CLAT UG Batch 29, prepared in the official passage-based format.

Continue revision

English Language310 questions with explanationsCurrent Affairs including General Knowledge310 questions with explanationsLogical Reasoning310 questions with explanationsQuantitative Techniques310 questions with explanations