Law (UGC/NET Paper II & III)

Precedent (stare decisis) is fundamental to common law systems where judicial decisions create binding law. In civil law systems, while not traditionally a formal source, modern practitioners increasingly reference precedents. International law uses ICJ decisions as persuasive authority. The broad view acknowledges precedent's role across all systems, though binding strength varies.

Consensus ad idem is a Latin term meaning 'meeting of minds' or 'common intention'. It's essential for a valid contract - both parties must agree to the same thing in the same sense. Without this mutual understanding, there's no genuine agreement and thus no contract. Option B correctly identifies this meaning.

The 86th Constitutional Amendment Act (2002) added Article 51-A(k) as the eleventh fundamental duty. This duty imposes a responsibility on parents and guardians to provide education opportunities to their children aged 6-14 years. The amendment also made free and compulsory education a fundamental right under Article 21-A.

A corporate aggregate is the correct legal term for a corporation as a continuing entity that exists independently of its specific members at any given time. It represents the incorporation of successive persons who become members of the corporation over time. This concept is fundamental to understanding corporate personality and perpetual succession.

Under Section 7 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, acceptance must be absolute and unqualified to convert a proposal into a promise. Any modification or variation to the terms of the proposal constitutes a counter-offer, not acceptance. Qualified acceptance destroys the original proposal and creates a new offer.

Section 2(ii) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriage Act, 1939 provides that a Muslim wife may seek divorce if her husband has been insane for a period of at least two years. This ground recognizes the hardship and practical difficulties of maintaining marriage with a mentally unsound spouse. The two-year requirement ensures permanence of insanity before divorce is granted.

Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1862 establishes joint liability when a criminal act is done by several persons with common intention. The requirement for fixing joint liability specifically depends on common intention - a prior meeting of minds to commit a particular crime. Common object alone is insufficient for joint liability under this section.

Friedrich Carl von Savigny, the German jurist, propounded the Volkgeist theory which holds that law originates from the spirit of the people (Volksgeist). According to this theory, law is not made but discovered from the collective consciousness and traditions of a nation. Savigny's historical school opposed codification and emphasized custom as the true source of law.

This is a duplicate of question 218631 testing the same legal principle. For acceptance to convert a proposal into a promise under Indian Contract Act, it must be absolute and unqualified. Any qualification, condition, or variation makes it a counter-offer rather than valid acceptance.

The Islamic Academy of Education case (TMA Pai Foundation case) primarily laid down guidelines for fixing fees by private educational institutions. While it also covered other aspects of minority institution rights, the question focuses on fee regulation guidelines. The case established that private institutions can fix their own fees subject to reasonable regulations by the state.

The rule of strict liability (Rylands v Fletcher) applies when a non-natural use of land causes dangerous things to escape. The person bringing dangerous things cannot plead lack of mens rea as defense - strict liability means liability without fault. The Reason correctly states that strict liability doesn't apply to every situation, but the Assertion is wrong because mens rea is irrelevant in strict liability cases.

The legal maxim 'Qui facit per alium facit per se' means 'He who acts through another acts himself'. This fundamental principle of agency law establishes that an agent's actions within authority are attributed to the principal. It's the foundation of vicarious liability and the entire agency relationship in law.

Under Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act, agreements made out of natural love and affection are valid even without consideration, provided they meet certain conditions. The parties must be close relatives, the love and affection must be natural, and the agreement must be in writing and registered. This is a well-recognized exception to the requirement of consideration.

The Supreme Court awarded compensation of Rs. 20 lakh in cases related to 'Bandh' calls. BJP was one of the political parties held liable for losses caused by bandh calls. The question tests knowledge of specific Supreme Court judgments on political party accountability for bandh-related damages.

In Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, the Supreme Court held that bodies which are agencies or instrumentalities of government can be considered 'authorities' under Article 12 of the Constitution, making them subject to fundamental rights writ jurisdiction. This case established the test for determining when a body qualifies as a state instrumentality.

The correct matching of writs with their purposes is: Habeas Corpus (iii) addresses unlawful detention; Mandamus (iv) compels performance of public duties; Quo Warranto (i) challenges unlawful occupation of public office; Certiorari (ii) involves superior courts directing subordinate courts. Option B correctly matches all pairs.

In Bangalore Water Supply v. A. Rajappa, the Supreme Court laid down the 'Triple Test' for determining what constitutes an 'industry' under Section 2(j) of the Industrial Disputes Act. The triple test considers: (1) systematic activity, (2) cooperation between employer and employees, and (3) production/distribution of goods or services if organized with capital investment.

Crime is both an illegal act (violates law) and an immoral act (violates moral standards). Most legal definitions and criminological theories recognize that crimes typically violate both legal codes and social morality, though there can be technical violations of law that aren't necessarily immoral. Option D correctly states that crime is both illegal AND immoral.

In criminal law and tort law, a person is held responsible only for consequences that are not too remote from their action. The doctrine of remoteness limits liability to direct and foreseeable consequences. Option A correctly identifies 'remote' as the legal term used to describe consequences too far removed from the original act to warrant liability.