Important MCQ's Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations

Q 1. State whether it is permissible for the High Courts in a Second Appeal to create a new case for the parties while framing additional questions of law which were never raised in the pleadings.a. No, the High Court cannot create such question of laws which were never a part of the pleadings.b. Yes, the High Court had a wide power to frame any such additional issues which it find appropriate for the adjudication of the case.c. Yes, the High Court can even frame such issues that were never part of the pleadings.d. Both (b) and (c)Answer: Option (a)Explanation: Recently, the Supreme Court held that the Courts at the Appellate stage of civil suits cannot create a new case for the parties while framing such additional issues that were never raised in the pleadings of the parties.Civil Procedure Code | Appellate Court Can't Create New Case For Parties & Frame Issues Without Following Order XLI : Supreme CourtQ 2. In a marital dispute, an FIR was registered by the wife against her husband and in-laws. A chargesheet was filed against them, however the High Court refused to quash the pending criminal case under Section 482 CrPC. Decide whether the FIR could be quashed upon filing of a chargesheet.a. No, once the chargesheet is filed then the FIR couldn't be quashed.b. Yes, there's no bar for the High Court to exercise its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR if the court is satisfied that continuing the proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law.c. No, the High Court usually doesn't interfere in cases where the chargesheet is filed.d. Both (a) and (c)Answer: Option (b)Explanation: The Supreme Court on Wednesday (August 28) recently reiterated that the high court is empowered under section 482 CrPC to quash an FIR even after a charge sheet is filed if the court is satisfied that continuing the proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law.High Court Can Quash FIR Even After Charge-Sheet Is Filed : Supreme Court Q 3. The Appellant filed an application seeking the rescission of a contract under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 ("SRA") against the failure of the decree-holder/respondent to pay the balance consideration of the sale amount. Since the Court that passed the decree also acted as the Execution Court, thus the Execution Court rejected the rescission application but permitted the decree-holder to deposit the balance consideration before the Execution Court. Whether it is permissible for the Execution Court to permit the decree-holder to deposit the balance consideration under Section 28 SRA? Decide.a. No, the application under Section 28 SRA could not be entertained in the Execution Proceedings.b. No, the application under Section 28 SRA could only be entertained in the Original Suit in which the decree was passed.c. Yes, the Executing Court could entertain an application under Section 28 SRA provided that it's the Court of First Instance that passed the Decree.d. Both (a) and (b)Answer: Option (c)Explanation: Although the application under Section 28 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 ("SRA") seeking rescission of a contract or extension of a time limit for deposit of a balance amount must be decided in the original suit where the decree was passed and not in the Execution Proceedings, the Supreme Court in a recent decision justified the Executive Court's decision to extend the time limit for payment of the balance amount consideration being payable by the decree-holder.Specific Relief Act | Execution Court Can Entertain Application Under S.28 Provided It's The Court Which Passed The Decree : Supreme CourtQ 4. A husband has deserted his wife and filed a divorce petition before the Family Court which had passed a divorce decree in favor of the husband. Decide whether the Family Court can pass a divorce decree against the wife when no fault was attributed to her in the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.a. Yes, the family court didn't commit an error while passing a divorce decree against the wife even though no fault was attributed to her.b. No, the family court committed an error in granting a divorce decree against the wife despite a finding of no fault on her part.c. The husband cannot benefit from seeking annulment of the marriage when he was solely responsible for the marital relationship breakdown.d. Both (b) and (c)Answer: Option (d)Explanation: In a recent case, the Supreme Court expressed dismay over the mechanical approach adopted by the Family Court in granting a divorce decree against the wife despite no fault being attributed to her. “The bogey of irretrievably breaking down of marriage cannot be used to the advantage of a party (husband in this case) who is solely responsible for tearing down the marital relationship.”, the court said.Irretrievable Breakdown Of Marriage Can't Be Used To Advantage Of Party Responsible For Collapse Of Marriage : Supreme CourtQ 5. Based on the complaint filed by the complainant, proceedings were drawn up under Section 138...

Important MCQ's Based On Latest Supreme Court Judgments For Law Examinations

Yash Mittal

Tags