PREVIOUS YEAR UPSC LAW OPTIONAL QUESTION SERIES | THE PROGRESS | ISSUE NO : 4 | PROBLEM BASE

SUBJECT : LAW OF CONTRACTS TOPIC : CONSENT

UPSC Law Optional Mains Simulation ! Exercise

Dear Aspirants - We have posted a previous year UPSC Law Optional question with model answer. Mere reading the answer will help you little, because in Law Optional Mains, UPSC tends to ask similar question line. Thus try to get a simulation exercise before reading the actual answer. This will help you to develop answer framing skill which is a major scoring factor in UPSC Mains.

What To do ?

1. Read The question asked

2. Understand the question

3. Break the question into parts if it is a complex question / Identify the core area of the question

4. Plan your answer line - what you would concentrate on etc.

Do all of the above within 2 minutes - UPSC Mains is all about how you write within stipulated time.

LET'S DO IT !!!!!

QUESTION 4 : PREVIOUS YEAR LAW OPTIONAL UPSC QUESTION | YEAR 1990 | QUESTION 6 (B)

A takes on hire a fishing trawler from B for the purpose of deep sea fishing. The trawler was imported by B and was never used by him. Under the contract A was to get the necessary repairs done in the trawler to make it sea-worthy, for which B would pay. After it was certified seaworthy, A was to pay monthly rent, while the repairing was being done, A discovered that the refrigeration equipment of the trawler was not capable of bringing down the temperature to such a low level as is necessary to use the trawler for deep sea fishing. A sues for declaration that the contract is void and for recovery of the expenses incurred on repairs. There is no evidence that during the negotiation for contract there was any discussion about the quality of the refrigeration of the trawler, but the purpose of chartering of trawler was known to B. How will you decide?

Answer line : This is a problem question – thus following subjects must be touched

Relevant Legal Provision : Sec: 17 ICA – Fraud.

Issue involved : Whether B has committed fraud ?

Whether silence of B amounts to fraud ?

Conclusion : Whether you decide B liable or not ?

Case Law to refer : I.T.C. Limited vs George Joseph Fernandes & Anr on 6 February, 198

This is a problem based question thus following discussions given – The aspirants are expected to provide their own analysis and answer based on the below sketch.

ISSUE 1 : Whether the contract is void ?

ISSUE 2 : Whether B is liable for payment of repairs ?

RELEVANT LEGAL PROVISION : sec: 17 ICA – This provision defines what is fraud – Explanation to sec: 17 is directly involved.

ISSUE 1 : Whether the contract is void ? Contract would be void only when it was affected by fraud and the affected party wants to call it off.

Thus sub issue are as follows :

· Whether B has committed fraud ?

· Whether B’s silence amounts to active concealment ?

· Whether B had duty to speak ?

· Whether A can reasonably find out the fault in refrigeration system on examination ?

· Whether B is actually aware of the fault in refrigeration as he just imported it and did not use the same ?

ISSUE 2 : Whether B is liable for payment of repair ? If contract is void then B is liable or else he is not.

CASE TO REFER : I.T.C. Limited vs George Joseph Fernandes & Anr on 6 February, 198 – Similar facts – held to be mutual mistake of parties. Aspirants need not agree with the case .