Match List I containing cases with List II containing respective areas of contract and select the correct answers using the given below:
| List I | List II |
| a. Balfour v. Balfour | 1. Frustration of contract |
| b. Felthouse v. Bindley | 2. Invitation to receive offer |
| c. Krell v. Henry | 3. Intention to contract |
| d. Harvey v. Facey | 4. Communication of acceptance to offeror |
A. a-3, b-1, c-4, d-2
B. a-3, b-4, c-1, d-2
C. a-3, b-2, c-1, d-4
D. a-4, b-2, c-3, d-1
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