Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations

Q 1. An indigent wanted to prefer an appeal before the High Court, however, the High Court dismissed the appeal on the ground that the indigent was awarded compensation by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, thus, he no longer remains an indigent person. On the other hand, it was contended by an indigent that though compensation was awarded to him but he has not received the compensation, therefore, he should be treated as an indigent person for filing an appeal. Decide.a. Indigency Extinguishes as soon as compensation is awarded.b. Indigency doesn't extinguish on awarding of compensation.c. Indigency Extinguishes only after receiving the compensation amount.d. Both (b) and (c)Answer: Option (d)Explanation: The Supreme Court observed that even though the original claimant/ appellant was awarded money, no money was paid to her. Thus, her indigency was not extinguished. Can A Person, Awarded Monetary Compensation But Has Not Received It, File Appeal As Indigent? Supreme Court AnswersQ 2. A tenant continues to remain on the rented premises after the expiry of the tenancy agreement and refuses to pay compensation to the landlord for the additional days he stayed on the property after the expiry of the tenancy agreement. Decide.a. The tenant would not be entitled to compensate the landlord because there was no eviction order against the tenant.b. The landlord would be entitled to receive compensation in the form of 'mesne profit' despite no eviction order against the tenant.c. The moment the tenancy right is extinguished the tenant becomes 'tenant at sufferance'. d. Both (b) and (c)Answer: Option (d)Explanation: The Supreme Court held that if the tenant continues to remain in the rented premises even after the tenancy rights are extinguished, then the landlord would be entitled to receive compensation in the form of 'mesne profit' from the tenant.Tenant Continuing In Possession After Expiry Of Tenancy Liable To Compensate Landlord By Paying 'Mesne Profits': Supreme CourtQ 3. A suit was filed belatedly, however, the Court refused to dismiss the suit on the point of limitation because the defence of limitation was not set up while deciding the admissibility of the suit. Decide.a. Suit filed after the limitation period should be dismissed, even if a defence of limitation is not set up.b. The court has to dismiss any suit instituted after the prescribed period of limitation irrespective of the fact that limitation has not been set up as a defence.c. Suit should not be dismissed unless a defence of limitation is not set up.d. Both (a) and (b)Answer: Option (d)Explanation: The Supreme Court held that even if the plea of limitation is not set up as a defence, the Court has to dismiss the suit if it is barred by limitation. As per the mandate of Section 3 of the Limitation Act, the court has to dismiss any suit instituted after the prescribed period of limitation irrespective of the fact that limitation has not been set up as a defence.Time-Barred Suit Must Be Dismissed Even If Plea Of Limitation Isn't Raised As Defence: Supreme CourtQ 4. Upon receiving a private complaint, the magistrate exercised its judicial powers to order an investigation by the police under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. However, the High Court set aside the magistrate's order. Decide.a. High Court should not have set aside the magistrate's order as the magistrate is not considered to have taken cognizance of an offence while directing a police investigation.b. High Court should not have set aside the magistrate's order as the magistrate is considered to have taken cognizance of an offence after the completion of an investigation by resorting to Section 200 of Cr.P.C.c. High Court should not have set aside the magistrate's order passed in the proper exercise of his judicial powers.d. All of the aboveAnswer: Option (d)Explanation: Recently, the Supreme Court reiterated that a Judicial Magistrate cannot be said to have taken cognizance of an offence by directing an investigation by the police under Section 156 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.Magistrate Doesn't Take Cognizance Of Offence While Directing Police Investigation As Per S.156(3) CrPC: Supreme CourtQ 5. A suit for the specific performance of the contract wasn't preferred by the plaintiff immediately after the breach of contract but on the last day of the prescribed limitation period of three years. Decide.a. The specific performance can be refused even if a suit is preferred within limitation.b. Despite knowing the fact of the breach of the contract well before the filing of the suit if a suit is not preferred within a reasonable time then the specific performance may denied due to the plaintiff's conduct.c. Three-year limitation period for filing the suit for specific performance of the contract wouldn't grant liberty to a plaintiff to file a suit at the last moment and obtain specific performance despite knowing about the breach of contract.d. All of the aboveAnswer: Option...

Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations

Yash Mittal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Yash Mittal

Important MCQs Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations

Yash Mittal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Yash Mittal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers