By a contract there are two sets of promises, with one set of promises being legal, and other set of promises being illegal. In view of the statement, which one of the following is correct?
A. There can be such a contract vide Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act
B. There can be such a contract, but the contract will only be for the legal set and not for the illegal set of promises vide Sections 57 and 58 of the Indian Contract Act
C. The contract as a whole will be enforceable at the option of the buyer and not the seller
D. There can be a contract of two set of promises, with one set of promises being legal and the other set of promises being illegal, provided both the set of promises are a commercial contract and the monetary value of the illegal set of promises is reduced from the value of the legal set of promises, and enforcement is only for the net value
Answer: Option B
This Question Belongs to Law >> Indian Contract Act
Indian Contract Act:- Gods displayed in showcase of a shop with price tag is -
A. Invitation to offer
B. Counteroffer
C. Communication
D. None of these
A. Is available to Y's representatives alone
B. Is available to Z alone
C. Is available to Y's representatives & Z both
D. Is available to Y's representatives & after the death of Z, his representatives
Moses v. Macferlan (1555-1774) is a case relating to
A. Theory of unjust enrichment
B. The right of lien
C. Test of agency
D. Doctrine of frustration
A. The active concealment of a fact by one having knowledge or belief of the fact
B. A promise made without any intention of performing it
C. The suggestion, as a fact, of that which is true, by one who does believe it to be true
D. None above
Join The Discussion