Which of the following was never held or observed by the Privy Council in Mohori Bibee v. Dharamodas Ghose
A. An agreement made by a minor is void
B. The minor's agreement being void, he could not be asked to repay
C. Section 64 and 65 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 allow compensation to be made by a person who gets undue benefit in a case, but those Sections do not cover the case where the agreement is void ab initio as in the case of a minor
D. Since the loan had been given to the minor with the full knowledge about his infancy, the money lender can still be asked to be compensated under the Specific Relief Act, 1963
Answer: Option D
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