ExamVeda
Login
Home
11
The Supreme Court's directive calling for compulsory registration of marriages was laid down in-
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option C
No explanation is given for this question. Let's Discuss on Board
12
The Hindu Succession Act, 1956, abolishes
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option D
No explanation is given for this question. Let's Discuss on Board
13
Property acquired by a male under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 is his
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option A
No explanation is given for this question. Let's Discuss on Board
14
The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 became applicable on
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option D
No explanation is given for this question. Let's Discuss on Board
15
Father-in-law's obligation to maintain the daughter-in-law is
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option B
No explanation is given for this question. Let's Discuss on Board
16
In Gita Jagdish Mangtani v Jadish Mangtani the Supreme Court dealt with
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option C
No explanation is given for this question. Let's Discuss on Board
17
Give correct response
The alienation by Karta will not be considered as for the purpose of legal necessity?
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option B
No explanation is given for this question. Let's Discuss on Board
18
The wife is entitled to separate residence and maintenance if the husband is under section 18(2) of the Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option A
No explanation is given for this question. Let's Discuss on Board
19
Which of the following cannot be a Karta:
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option A
Solution:
Option A: A male below the age of 18
The 2005 amendment allows females to become Kartas, but it doesn't change the requirement that the Karta should be an adult. Therefore, a male below the age of 18 still "cannot" be a Karta.

Option B: A married female
The 2005 amendment indeed allows married females to become Kartas in an HUF. So, a married female "can" be a Karta under the amended Hindu Succession Act.

Option C: Both (A) and (B)
This option suggests that both a male below the age of 18 and a married female "cannot" be a Karta. While a male below the age of 18 cannot be a Karta, a married female "can" be a Karta according to the 2005 amendment. Therefore, this option is partially correct.

Option D: An adult male coparcener
An adult male coparcener can still be a Karta in an HUF even after the 2005 amendment. The amendment expanded the eligibility criteria to include females but did not exclude adult male coparceners from being Kartas.

So, the correct answer is Option A: A male below the age of 18. According to the amended Hindu Succession Act, a male below the age of 18 cannot be a Karta in an HUF.
20
Which of the following statements is incorrect?
Discuss
Answer & Solution
Answer: Option C
No explanation is given for this question. Let's Discuss on Board