You are here
Home > Uncategorized > CLAT Legal Aptitude Last Year Questions

CLAT Legal Aptitude Last Year Questions

Q1. Which of the following is correct?
(a) If Ajay is allowed to recover the money, that will defeat the law framed for protecting the minors against fraudulent persons.
(b) If Ajay is not allowed to recover that will cause him injustice as he has not paid the entire sale price.
(c) If Ajay is not allowed to recover, Chaaru will benefit from both the money and the land.
(d) None of the above.
Directions: Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions. In answering the following questions, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for every problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than those stated in the problem. Rules:A. The act of using threats to force another person to enter into a contract is called coercion. B. The act of using influence on another and taking undue advantage of that person is called undue influence. C. In order to prove coercion, the existence of the use of threat, in any form and manner, is necessary. If coercion is proved, the person who has been so threatened can refuse to abide by the contract. D. In order to prove undue influence, there has to be a pre-existing relationship between the parties to a contract. The relationship has to be of such a nature that one is in a position to influence the other. If it is proven that there has been undue influence, the party who has been so influenced need not enforce the contract or perform his obligations under the contract. Facts: Aadil and Baalu are best friends. Aadil is the son of a multi-millionaire business person, Chulbul who owns Maakhan Pharmaceuticals. Baalu is the son of a bank employee, Dhanraj. One day, Aadil is abducted from his office by Baalu. Chulbul receives a phone call from Dhanraj telling him that if he does not make Baalu the CEO of Maakhan Pharmaceuticals, Aadil will be killed. Chulbul reluctantly agrees to make Baalu the CEO. Subsequently Chulbul and Baalu sign an employment contract. However, as soon as Aadil is released and safely returns home, Chulbul tells Baalu that he shall not enforce the employment contract. Baalu and Dhanraj are not sure as to what is to be done next.

Q2. As per the rules and the given facts, who coerces whom?
(a) Aadil coerces Baalu
(b) Baalu coerces Chulbul
(c) Dhanraj coerces Chulbul
(d) None of the above

Q3. In the above fact situation
(a) there is undue influence exercised by Dhanraj on Baalu.
(b) there is undue influence exercised by Aadil on Chulbul.
(c) there is no undue influence.
(d) none of the above.

Q4. Chulbul is
(a) justified in refusing to enforce the employment contract as Chulbul was coerced by Dhanraj.
(b) justified in refusing to enforce the employment contract as Baalu was complicity in the coercive act.
(c) not justified in refusing to enforce the employment contract as Baalu was an innocent person and has not coerced Chulbul.
(d) Both a and b

Q5. Baalu will succeed in getting the employment contract enforced if he can show that
(a) he is the best friend of Aadil.
(b) it was his father, and not he, who used coercion against Chulbul.
(c) Chulbul has promised his father to employ him.
(d) None of the above.
Directions: Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions. In answering the following questions, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for every problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than those stated in the problem. Rule A: When a State undertakes any measure, the eff ects of the measure must be the same for all those who are aff ected by it. Facts: Hundred mountaineers embarked on an extremely risky climbing expedition in Leh. Weather conditions worsened five days into the expedition and the mountaineers are trapped under heavy snow. The government received information of this tragedy only two weeks after the unfortunate incident and has only 24-hours in which to send rescue helicopters. Weather stations across the world confirm that this particular region of Leh will experience blizzards of unprecedented intensity for almost two weeks after this 24 hour window rendering any helicopter activity in the region impossible and certain death for anyone left behind. The government has only five rescue helicopters with a maximum capacity of 50 people (excluding pilots and requisite soldiers) and these helicopters can fly only once in 24 hours to such altitudes. As the Air Force gets ready to send the helicopters, an emergency hearing is convened in the Supreme Court to challenge this measure as this would leave 50 people to die.

Q6. If you were the judge required to apply Rule A, you would decide that
(a) as many lives must be saved as possible.
(b) if everyone cannot be rescued, then everyone must be left behind.
(c) a measure cannot be upheld at the cost of 50 lives.
(d) it must be left to those who are trapped to decide if they want half amongst them to be saved and leave the rest to die. Rule B: When a State undertakes any measure, every one aff ected must have an equal chance to benefit from it.

Q7. As the government prepares to send in rescue helicopters, which option would be acceptable only under Rule B and not Rule A?
(a) A lottery to choose the 50 survivors excluding those diagnosed with terminal illnesses from participating in the lottery.
(b) A lottery to decide the 50 survivors with single parents of children below five years of age automatically qualifying to be rescued.
(c) The 50 youngest people should be rescued.
(d) None of the above.

Q8. Choosing 50 survivors exclusively by a lottery would be
(a) permissible under Rules A and B.
(b) impermissible under Rules A and B.
(c) permissible only under Rule B.
(d) permissible only under Rule A.

Q9. If the government decides that it will either save everyone or save none, it would be
(a) permissible under Rules A and B.
(b) impermissible under Rules A and B.
(c) permissible only under Rule A.
(d) permissible only under Rule B.
Directions: Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions. In answering the following questions, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for every problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than those stated in the problem. Rules:A. A person is an employee of another if the mode and the manner in which he or she carries out his work is subject to control and supervision of the latter. B. An employer is required to provide compensation to his or her employees for any injury caused by an accident arising in the course of employment. The term ‘in the course of the employment’ mean in the course of the work which the employee is contracted to do and which is incidental to it. Facts: Messrs Zafar Abidi and Co. (Company) manufactures bidis with the help of persons known as ‘pattadars’. The pattadars are supplied tobacco and leaves by the Company and are required to roll them into bidis and bring the bidis back to the Company. The pattadars are free to roll the bidis either in the factory or anywhere else they prefer. They are not bound to attend the factory for any fixed hours of work or for any fixed number of days. Neither are they required to roll up any fixed number of bidis. The Company verifies whether the bidis adhere to the specified instructions or not and pays the pattadars on the basis of the number of bidis that are found to be of right quality. Aashish Mathew is one of the pattadars of the Company. He was hit by a car just outside the precinct of the factory while he was heading to have lunch in a nearby food-stall. Aashish Mathew has applied for compensation from the Company.

Q10. Which of the following statements can most plausibly be inferred from the application of the rules to the given facts?
(a) Aashish Mathew is an employee of the Company because the latter exercises control over the manner in which Aashish Mathew carries out his work.
(b) Aashish Mathew is not an employee but an independent contractor as he does not have a fixed salary.
(c) Aashish Mathew is an employee because the Company exercises control over the final quality of the bidis.
(d) Verification of the quality of bidis amounts to control over the product and not control over the mode and method of work and therefore, Aashish Mathew is not an employee of the Company.

Q11. In case the pattadars were compulsorily required to work in the factory for a minimum number of hours every day, then it would be correct to state that
(a) the injury was not caused by an accident in the course of employment.
(b) Aashish Mathew would not be an employee as the Company would have still not exercised control over the manner of work.
(c) the injury suff ered by Aashish Mathew could not be held to be one caused by an accident.
(d) stipulations on place and hours of work relate to manner and mode of work and therefore, Aashish Mathew would be held to be an employee of the Company.

Q12. According to the facts and the rules specified, which of the following propositions is correct?
(a) The Company is not liable to pay compensation as the injury to Aashish Mathew was not caused by an accident arising in the course of employment.
(b) The Company is liable to pay the compensation.
(c) Since the injury did not arise in the course of employment, the Company would not be liable to pay the compensation even though Aashish Mathew is an employee of the company.
(d) The Company is liable to pay the compensation as Aashish Mathew is a contracted pattadar with the company.

Q13. Select the statement that could be said to be most direct inference from specified.
(a) The injury to Aashish Mathew did not arise in the course of employment as he was not rolling bidis at the time when he was hit by the car.
(b) Since Ashish Mathew is a contracted pattadar with the Company, it shall be presumed that the injury was caused by an accident in the course of employment.
(c) Since there was no relationship of employment between Aashish Mathew and the Company, the injury suff ered by Aashish Mathew could not be held to be one arising in the course of employment notwithstanding the fact that the concerned injury was caused while he was involved in an activity incidental to his duties.
(d) As the concerned injury was caused to Aashish Mathew while he was involved in an activity incidental to his duties, the injury did arise in the course of employment.

Q14. If the pattadars were compulsorily required to work in the factory for a minimum number of hours every day, then the Company would have been liable to pay compensation to Aashish Mathew if the latter
(a) had been assaulted and grievously hurt by his neighbor inside the factory precincts over a property dispute.
(b) had slipped and fractured his arm while trying to commute on a city bus from his home to the factory.
(c) had been injured while commuting on a bus provided by the Company, which he was required by his contract to use every day.
(d) had been caught in the middle of a cross- fire between police and a gang of robbers while traveling to work on a city bus.
Directions: Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions. In answering the following questions, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for every problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than those stated in the problem. Rules:A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property out of his or her possession, is said to commit theft. B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage. C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property. Facts: Veena, an old lady of 78 years, used to live with her grand-daughter Indira. Veena was ill and therefore bed-ridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Indira hired a cleaner, Lucky, to clean the room and throwaway any rubbish that may be there. There was a pile of old newspapers which Veena had stacked in a corner of her room. Lucky asked Indira if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes. Lucky took the pile to a municipality rubbish dump. While Lucky was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Indira probably would not want this old painting back, especially because it was torn in several places and the color was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old masterpiece, and worth Rs. 20,000. Before mounting the painting, Lucky pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear any more. By doing so, he made its professional restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half. Lucky’s neighbor Kamala discovered that the painting belonged to Indira. With the motive of returning the painting to Indira, Kamala climbed through an open window into Lucky’s room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house.

Q15. Has Lucky committed theft?
(a) Yes, Lucky has committed theft of the newspapers and the painting.
(b) No, Lucky has not committed theft because he had Veena’s consent.
(c) Yes, Lucky has committed theft of the painting, but not of the newspapers.
(d) No, Lucky has not committed theft because he has not moved the painting out of Veena’s possession.
 1. (b) 2. (c) 3. (c) 4. (a) 5. (d) 6. (a) 7. (b) 8. (c) 9. (c) 10. (d) 11. (d) 12. (a) 13. (c) 14. (c) 15. (b)

Top
error: Content is protected !!