Law Legal Studies · General Awareness
Indian Law and Jurisprudence
1,379 Questions
Indian law and jurisprudence cover statutory frameworks like the Companies Act, Consumer Protection Act, and Indian Penal Code, alongside landmark judicial precedents. Legal topics are crucial for law entrance exams, judiciary examinations, and general awareness papers. Answer these questions to learn about defamation, administrative tribunals, and criminal procedure code sections.
IPC and defamation lawsAdministrative Tribunals ActConsumer Protection ActCriminal Procedure Code sectionsArbitration and Conciliation ActMental Health Act provisions
Indian Law and Jurisprudence Questions
-
Section 11
-
Section 4
-
Section 5
-
Section 9
C
Correct answer
Explanation
Option (1) is incorrect: Section 11 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with cases in which specific performance of contracts is connected with trust enforceable.
Option (2) is incorrect: Section 4 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with specific relief to be granted only for enforcing individual civil rights and not for enforcing penal laws.
Option (3) is correct: Section 5 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with recovery of specific immovable property.
Option (4) is incorrect: Section 9 of Specific Relief Act, 1963 deals with defence respecting suits for relief based on contract.
-
specific performance of a part of the contract
-
defence respecting suits for relief based on contract
-
specific performance of contracts connected with trusts
-
circumstances in which specific performance of a contract is enforceable
C
Correct answer
Explanation
Option (1) is incorrect: Section 12 of Specific Relief Act provides for specific performance of part of contract.
Option (2) is incorrect: Section 9 of Specific Relief Act provides for defence respecting suits for relief based on contract.
Option (3) is correct: Section 11 of Specific Relief Act deals with cases in which specific performance of contracts is connected with trust enforceable.
Option (4) is incorrect: Section 10 of Specific Relief Act deals with cases in which specific performance of contract is enforceable.
-
is a right in rem
-
is a right in personam
-
Both (1) and (2)
-
None of these
B
Correct answer
Explanation
Option (1) is incorrect: It is not a right in rem.
Option (2) is correct: Obligation under Specific Relief Act is a right in person, i.e. it is an obligation to the parties of suit.
Option (3) is incorrect: Only (2)
Option (4) is incorrect: Only (2)
-
Section 38
-
Section 39
-
Section 40
-
Section 37
C
Correct answer
Explanation
Option (1) is incorrect: Section 38 of the Act deals with perpetual injunctions when granted.
Option (2) is incorrect: Section 39 of the Act deals with mandatory injunctions.
Option (3) is correct: Section 40 of the Act states provision for damages in lieu of, or in addition to injunction.
Option (4) is incorrect: Section 37 of the Specific Relief Act talks about temporary and perpetual injunctions.
-
be declined
-
not be declined
-
be commuted
-
be withheld
A
Correct answer
Explanation
Option (1) is correct: U/s 34 of the Act, the words are used “the court may in its discretion make therein a declaration”, so the court can decline a declaratory decree.
Option (2) is incorrect: Court can decline a declaratory decree.
Option (3) is incorrect: Court cannot commute a declaratory decree.
Option (4) is incorrect: Declaratory decree cannot be withheld u/s 34.
-
Vishakha Vs. State of Rajasthan
-
Kapila Hingurani Vs.State of Bihar
-
Tukaram Vs.State of Maha-rashtra
-
Ahmed Khan Vs. Shahbano Begam
-
M. C. Mehta Vs. Union of India
-
Lily Thomas Vs. Union of India
-
Dr. B. L. Wadehra Vs. NCT Delhi
-
Indira Sawhney Vs. Union of India
-
Enactment of Uniform Civil Code
-
Enactment of Uniform Hindu Code
-
Enactment of Uniform law for both Hindus and Christians
-
None of these
D
Correct answer
Explanation
John Vallamattom vs. Union of India (2003) is a landmark case challenging the constitutional validity of Section 14 of the Indian Income Tax Act, 1961, which provided tax exemption only to Hindu Undivided Families. The Supreme Court struck down the provision as unconstitutional, recommending a Uniform Civil Code for all religious communities.
-
T.K. Rangrajan Vs. Govt. of Tamil Nadu AIR 2003 SC
-
Shyam Narayan Vs. Union of India AIR 2003 M.P.
-
High Court of Gujarat Vs. Gujarat Kisan Mazdoor (2003) 4 SCC
-
M.K. Usman Vs. C.S. Santhe AIR 2003 Kerala
-
Assam
-
West Bengal
-
Nagaland
-
Manipur
A
Correct answer
Explanation
The Supreme Court struck down the IMDT Act in 2005 in the Sarbananda Sonowal case, holding it unconstitutional and violative of Article 14. The Act was specific to Assam to detect illegal migrants in the state.
-
keeping undeclared foreign exchange
-
violating forest prevention laws
-
adulteration in food
-
none of these
A
Correct answer
Explanation
FERA (Foreign Exchange Regulation Act) was legislation governing foreign exchange transactions in India. A key provision allowed authorities to take individuals into custody for keeping undeclared foreign exchange, as FERA aimed to prevent black money and regulate foreign currency holdings.
-
1 and 2
-
1, 2 and 3
-
2 and 3
-
1 and 3
A
Correct answer
Explanation
Writ jurisdiction of Article 32 and 226 is suspended during emergency under Articles 359 and 358. MISA (Maintenance of Internal Security Act) and NSA (National Security Act) explicitly exclude writ jurisdiction. ESMA also has similar restrictions during certain conditions. Thus, writ jurisdiction is not available against MISA and NSA.
-
Indra Sawhney v. Union of India
-
Shankari Prasad v. Union of India
-
Minerva Mills v. Union of India
-
Bennett Coleman v. Union of India
C
Correct answer
Explanation
In the Minerva Mills case (1980), the Supreme Court struck down the 42nd Amendment's provision that gave all Directive Principles precedence over Fundamental Rights (Articles 14 and 19). The court ruled that the Constitution is founded on the bedrock of the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles.
-
No, only warning should be given
-
Yes, a punishment of transfer/ dismissal
-
Yes, a punishment of Rs.250 to a maximum of Rs.25,000
-
Yes, an imprisonment up to one month
C
Correct answer
Explanation
Every PIO will be liable for fine of Rs.250 per day, up to a maximum of Rs.25,000 for not accepting an application/ delaying information/ knowingly giving incomplete, incorrect, misleading information/ destroying information that has been requested/ obstructing furnishing of information in any manner.
A
Correct answer
Explanation
Yes. Right to information means right to access to information or material relating to the affairs of body owned, controlled or substantially financed by Government, non-Government organisation substantially financed, Record includes�
(a) any document, manuscript and file;
(b) any microfilm, microfiche and facsimile copy of a document;
(c) any reproduction of image or images embodied in such microfilm (whether enlarged or not); and
(d) any other material produced by a computer or any other device.