Some Important Solved Questions on Code of Civil Procedure,1908

1. What provision deal with the attachment of property in the execution of a decree?

     Ans: Sections 60 to 64 and Order 21 Rules 41 to 57 of CPC 

2. What is the effect of attachment of property in execution of decree?

     Ans:- As per sec 64 of C.P.C where an attachment has been made, any private transfer or delivery of the property attached or of any interest there in and any payment to the judgment-debtor of any debt, dividend or other monies contrary to such attachment, shall be void as against all claims enforceable under the attachment.

3. If a 3rd party purchases attached properties in a private sale and pays the decree debt in respect of which attachment is effected, whether the private sale transaction in his favour confers valid title?
    Ans: Normally valid title is passed to the purchaser. But explanation to Sec 64 C.P.C contemplates that the claim for ratable distribution of assets attached includes as a claim enforceable against the attachment 

4. What are the attachable properties under section 60 CPC?
   Ans: The following properties are liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree, namely:
(i) Lands, houses or other buildings,
(ii) Goods,
(iii) Money, Bank notes, Cheques, Bills of exchange, Hundis, Promissory notes,
(iv) Government securities, bonds or other securities for money, debts and shares in a corporation.
     It does not mean that the properties listed above are alone liable for attachment and sale and not other. What is not included in the above list is included under Sec. 60(1) by adding the words “all other saleable property movable or immovable, belonging to the judgement-debtor, or over which, or the profits of which, he has a disposing power which he may exercise for his own benefit, whether, the same be held in the name of the judgement-debtor or by another person in trust for him or on his behalf".

5. What are the properties which cannot be attached under CPC, 1908?
    Ans: The properties which cannot be attached under Sec. 60(1) CPC, 1908 are as follows-
(a) the necessary wearing-apparel, cooking vessels, beds and bedding of the judgement-debtor, his wife and children and such personal ornaments as, in accordance with religion usage, cannot be parted with by any women;
(b) Tools of artisans, in the opinion of the Court, be necessary to enable him to earn his livelihood as such (e.g., tools of carpenters, blacksmith, tailors etc.);
(c) Houses, sites and other buildings belonging to an agriculturist or a labourer or a domestic servant and occupied by him;
(d) Books of account;
(e) a mere right to sue for damages;
(f) Any right of personal service;
(g) Stipends and gratuities allowed to pensioners of the Government;
(h) The wages of labourers and domestic servants, whether payable in money or in kind;
(i) Salary to the extent of the first four hundred rupees and 2/3 of the remainder in the execution of any decree other than a decree for maintenance;
(i-a) one third of the salary in execution of any decree for maintenance;
(j) pay and allowances of persons to whom the Air Force Act, 1950 or the Army Act, 1950 or the Navy Act, 1957 applies;
(k) All compulsory deposits and other sums covered by Provident Funds Act of 1925 and declared by ‘the said Act not to be liable to attachment;
(ka) any sum which is covered by the Public Provident Fund Act of 1968 and declared by the said Act not to be liable to attachment;
(kb) all money payable under a policy of insurance on the life of the judgement debtor;
(kc) the interest of lessee of residential building to which the provisions of law for the time being in force relating to control of rent and accommodation apply;
(l) Any allowance forming part of the emoluments of any Government servant or Railway company may be exempted from attachment by gazette notification;
(m) An expectancy of succession by survivorship or other merely contingent or possible right or interest;
(n) A right to future maintenance;
(o) Any allowance declared by an Indian law to be exempt from liability to attachment or sale in execution of decree;
(p) When a movable property is exempt from sale for recovery of land revenue, such property is not liable for attachment and sale under this section.

IMMOVABLE PROPERTY UNDER TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT,1882 (IMPORTANT POINTS)

• Under Section 3(26) of the General Clauses Act, 1897, “Immovable property” shall include land, benefits to arise out of land, and things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to anything attached to the earth.
• Under Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, “immovable property” does not include standing timber, growing crops or grass.
• So far as the expression "attached to the earth" is concerned it occurs only in two sections of the Transfer of Property Act, namely, Sections 8 and 108 (h).
• But as a result of the above amalgamation, the meaning of the expression "attached to the earth" given in Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act is attracted to all immovable property referred to in the said Act.
• Immovable property includes land, buildings, hereditary allowances, rights to ways, lights, ferries, fisheries or any other benefit to arise out of the land, and things attached to the earth, or permanently fastened to anything which is attached to the earth, but not standing timber, growing crops nor grass. 
• The expression “attached to the earth” means—
  a.rooted in the earth, as in the case of trees and shrubs; 
  b.imbedded in the earth, as in the case of walls or buildings; or
  c.attached to what is so imbedded for the permanent beneficial enjoyment of that to which it is attached;
                   within the meaning of Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act but not otherwise.
• A hut is an immovable property, even if it is sold with the option to pull it down. A mortgage of the superstructure of a house though expressed to be exclusive of the land beneath creates an interest in immovable property, for it is permanently attached to the ground on which it is built.
• The question of whether trees are to be deemed as immovable property or not would depend on the way they have been dealt with by the parties in the particular transaction. If they are dealt with merely as standing trees, they would be immovable property under Section 3(26) of the General Clauses Act. On the other hand, if they are dealt with as "standing timber" they would be exempt from the definition of "immovable property" as contained in Section 3 of the Transfer of Property Act and Section 2(6) of the Registration Act.
• The Court in Mohammed Ibrahim v. Northern Circars Fibre Trading (AIR 1944 Mad 492) has held that what is really movable property may become immovable property if it is attached to the earth or permanently fastened to anything, which is attached to the earth. 

WITHDRAWAL AND COMPROMISE OF SUITS (Order 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure)

 Order 23 which deals with withdrawal and compromise of suits, provides for two types of withdrawals

• Absolute withdrawal, without the leave of the court

• Qualified withdrawal, with the leave of the court

Order 23 also provides for compromise of suits and effect thereof.

Important points to remember

Order 23 Rules 1 & 2

• At any time after the institution of a suit, the plaintiff may abandon his suit or abandon a part of his claim against all or any of the defendants without the leave of the court-  Rule 1(1)
• This right is absolute and unqualified, the permission of which the court cannot refuse.
• The Court can't compel the plaintiff to proceed with the suit unless any vested right comes into existence before such prayer is made.
• In case of abandonment or withdrawal of a suit or part of a claim without the leave of the court, the plaintiff will be precluded from instituting a fresh suit in respect of the same cause of action.
• It is in the discretion of the court to grant such permission and it can be granted by the court either on an application of the plaintiff or even suo motu. Such permission may be granted on such terms as to costs, etc as the Court thinks fit. The granting of permission removes the bar of Res judicata, restoring the plaintiff to the position which he would have occupied had he brought no suit at all.
• The maxim "invito beneficium non datur" means that the law confers, upon a man no rights or benefits which he does not desire, which forms the basis for Rule 1 .
• By the Amendment Act of 1976, a specific provision has been made that where the plaintiff is a minor, neither the suit nor any part of the claim can be abandoned without the leave of the court- Proviso to Rule 1(1). 
• An application for leave under the proviso to Rule 1(1) must be accompanied by an affidavit of the next friend and also, if the minor of such person is represented by a pleader, by a certificate of the pleader to the effect that the proposed abandonment is, in his opinion, for the minor's benefit- Rule 1(2).
• Where the court is satisfied that a suit must fail by reason of some formal defect, or there are sufficient grounds for allowing the plaintiff to institute a fresh suit for the subject-matter of a suit or part of a claim, it may (not shall) grant permission to withdraw such suit or such part of the claim with the liberty to file a fresh suit in respect of the subject-matter of such suit or such part of the claim on such terms as it thinks fit - Rule 1(3)
• The expression "formal defect" connotes some defect of form or procedure not affecting the merits of the case; such as notice under Section 80 of CPC, misjoinder of parties or of causes of action, non-payment of proper court fee or stamp fee, failure to disclose cause of action, mistake in not seeking proper relief, improper or erroneous valuation of the subject matter of the suit, absence of territorial jurisdiction of the court, defect in prayer clause, or where the plaintiff felt that the defendant was absent and even if the decree was passed, etc.  
• Defects that affect the merits of the case, or a defect which goes to the root of the plaintiff's case cannot be said to be a formal defect; e.g. non-joinder of a necessary party, omission to substitute heirs, omission to include all the causes of action in the plaint, non-registration of a partnership firm, bar of limitation, deliberate undervaluation of the subject-matter of the suit, addition of a new factual plea, failure to bring legal representatives on record, non - examination of material witnesses, insufficiency of evidence, filling of a representative suit without following the procedure prescribed by Order 1 Rule 8 etc.
• The expression " sufficient grounds" need not generally be construed ejusdem generis ( of the same kind or nature) with a formal defect. For instance, where the suit was premature, or it had become infructuous etc, it was held to be a sufficient ground. Wide and liberal should be given to the expression " sufficient grounds" by exercising power in the interest of justice ( ex debit justitiae)
• However, the power cannot be exercised where the plaintiff was not ready to conduct the suit or where no notice was served to the defendant due to death, etc.
• The plaintiff also becomes liable for such costs as the court may award to the defendant- Rule 1(4) 
• Rule 1A of Order 23 as added by the Amendment Actor of 1976 provides for the circumstances under which the defendant may be allowed to be transposed as a plaintiff where the suit is withdrawn by the plaintiff. 
• Where there are two or more plaintiff's in a suit, the suit or part of the claim cannot be abandoned or withdrawn without the consent of all the plaintiff's. The plaintiff who wants to abandon or withdraw from the suit is at the liberty to do so to the extent of his own interest in it.

Limitation: Rule 2

A plaintiff withdrawing a suit with liberty to file a fresh suit is bound by the law of limitation in the same manner as if the first suit has not been filed at all.

Applicability to other proceedings

• The provisions of this Order, apply to the withdrawal of appeals. The appellant has a right to withdraw his appeal unconditionally and if he makes such an application, the court must grant it, subject to costs, and he has no power to say that it will not permit the withdrawal and will go on with the hearing of the appeal.

• An appellate court can grant permission to withdraw a suit to file a fresh suit.

• When the plaintiff sues in a representative character, he cannot abandon or withdraw the suit or a part of the claim. He may however get out of the suit, but that does not end the litigation where other persons are interested in it and have a right to come in and continue the litigation.

• The general principles for withdrawal of suits also apply to petitions under Article 226 or Article 32 of the Constitution. But once a High Court or the Supreme Court allows the prayer of a petitioner or his advocate to withdraw the petition (provided the withdrawal is unconditional), he cannot thereafter institute a fresh petition on the same cause of action.

• If a writ petition is withdrawn on some technical defect or logistic problem or availability of alternative remedy or such formal objection, the fresh petition will not be barred.

• Order 23 does not apply to execution proceedings - Rule 4

• An order granting or refusing permission to withdraw the suit with permission to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action is neither a "decree" nor an appellate order. Hence, no appeal lies against such an order.

• An order granting or refusing permission to withdraw the suit with the permission to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action can be said to be "a case decided" under Section 115 of the Code, which is revisable.

Compromise of suit

• After the institution of the suit, it is open to the parties to compromise, adjust or settle it by an agreement or compromise.
• Rule 3 of Order23 lays down that
  1. where the court is satisfied that a suit has been adjusted wholly or in part by any lawful agreement in writing and signed by the parties
  2.where the defendant satisfies the plaintiff in respect of the whole or any part of the subject-matter of the suit,
           the court shall record such agreement compromise or satisfaction and pass a compromise decree accordingly.

• The court must be satisfied by taking evidence or  on affidavits or otherwise that the agreement is lawful and it can pass a decree in accordance with it

• A court passing a compromise decree performs a judicial act and not a ministerial act.

• An agreement or compromise which is void or voidable under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, shall not be deemed to be lawful within the meaning of Rule 3

Compromise on behalf of a minor

No next friend or guardian of a minor shall, without the leave of the court, enter into any agreement or compromise on behalf of the minor with reference to the suit, unless such leave is expressly recorded in the proceedings

Compromise by pleader

An advocate appearing for a party always has an implied authority to enter into a compromise on behalf of his client.

Bar to suit: Rule 3-A

No suit can be filed to set aside a compromise decree on the ground that it is not lawful. 

Representative Suit: Rule 3-B

• No agreement or compromise in a representative suit can be entered into without the leave of the court. 

• Before granting such leave, notice to the persons interested should be given by the court

Compromise decree and res judicata

A compromise decree is not a decision of the court. Hence, a compromise decree cannot operate as res judicata.

Compromise decree and estoppel 

A compromise decree is not a decision on merits as it cannot be said that the case was heard and finally decided.  It is based on consent or compromise of parties and therefore will operate as an estoppel.

Execution of compromise decree

• A consent decree is executable in the same manner as an ordinary decree.
• If the decree gives effect to an unlawful compromise or is passed by the court having no jurisdiction to pass it, it is a nullity, which cannot be cured even by the consent of the parties.
• Prior to the Amendment Act of 1976, a compromise decree could be passed only so far as it related to the suit. Following this Amendment Act, whether or not the subject-matter of the agreement, compromise or satisfaction is identical with the subject-matter of the suit, it is between the parties and the compromise is a lawful one, the court can pass such a decree.

Appeal

• No appeal lies against a decree passed by the court with the consent of parties, nor a suit can be instituted to set aside a compromise decree on the ground that such compromise is not lawful, though such order was appealable before the Amendment Act, 1976. 
• Rule 1-A(2) of Order 43, CPC, however, lays down that in an appeal against a decree passed after recording or refusing to record a compromise, the order recording or refusing to record a compromise can also be questioned.
• A party challenging the compromise can file an appeal under Section 96(1), CPC and Section 96(3), CPC shall not bar such an appeal.
• Such a decree can be challenged by filing a suit on the ground of fraud, undue influence or coercion.

Revision

An order recording or refusing to record compromise is a case decide within the meaning of Section 115 of CPC where a High Court can revise such order provided the conditions laid down in this section are satisfied.
                                                               

COERCION UNDER INDIAN CONTRACT ACT

Introduction

One of the essentials of a valid contract mentioned in Section 10 of the Indian Contract Act is that parties should enter into the contract with their free consent. According to Section 14 of the Indian Contract Act, consent is said to be free when it is not caused by

• coercion, as defined in Section 15, or
• undue influence, as defined in Section 16, or
• fraud, as defined in Section 17, or
• misrepresentation, as defined in Section 18, or
• mistake, subject to the provisions of Sections 20, 21 and 22

When consent to an agreement is caused by coercion, undue influence, fraud or misrepresentation, the agreement is a contract voidable at the option of the party whose consent was so caused.

Coercion

According to Section 15, coercion is the committing or threatening to commit, any act forbidden by the Indian Penal code, or the unlawful detaining, or threatening to detain, any property, to the prejudice of any person whatever with the intention of causing any person to enter into an agreement.

1. Act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code

    It has been noted above that if a person commits or threatens to commit an act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code with a view to obtaining the consent of the other person to an agreement, the consent in such a case is deemed to have been obtained by coercion. For instance, A threatens to shoot B if B does not agree to sell his property to A at a stated price, B's consent, in this case, has been obtained by coercion.
     
   For coercion, it is not necessary that the Indian Penal Code should be applicable at the place where the consent has been so caused. Explanation to Section 15 makes it clear that to constitute coercion, "it is immaterial whether the Indian Penal Code is or is not in force in the place where the coercion is employed." 

In Ranganayakamma v. Alwar Setti, I.L.R.(1889) 13 Mad. 214., the question before the Madras High Court was regarding the validity of the adoption of a boy by a widow, aged 13 years. On the death of her husband, the husband's dead body was not allowed to be removed from her house for cremation, by the relatives of the adopted boy until she adopted the boy. It was held that the adoption was not binding on the widow as her consent had been obtained by coercion. 

  In Chikkan Ammiraju v. Chikkam Seshama, I.L.R.(1918) 41 Mad. 33., the question before the Madras High Court was whether coercion could be caused by a threat to commit suicide. In this case, A, a Hindu, by a threat of suicide, induced his wife and son to execute a release deed in favour of A's brother in respect of certain properties claimed as their own by the wife and the son. 

     
The question before the court was whether a threat to commit suicide could be considered to be an act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code. It was held by Wallis, CJ and Seshagiri Ayyar, J. that a threat to commit suicide amounted to coercion within the meaning of Section 15 of the Indian Contract Act and therefore the release deed was voidable.

However, Oldfield, J., who dissented was of the view that suicide is not an act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code (only an attempt to commit suicide is punishable under Section 309, Indian Penal code) and a threat to do that could not be considered to be a threat to do a forbidden act within the meaning of Section 15 of the Contract Act.

2. Unlawful detaining of property

According to Section 15, coercion could also be caused by the unlawful detaining, or threatening to detain, any property, to the prejudice of any person whatever, with the intention of causing any person to enter into an agreement. If the detention of the property is not unlawful there is no coercion. For example, if a mortgagee refuses to convey the equity of redemption except on the terms dictated to him, there is nothing unlawful in it and therefore, no coercion is caused in this case.

3. To the prejudice of a person

Section 15 requires that there should be committing or threatening to commit, any act forbidden by the Indian Penal code, or the unlawful detaining, or threatening to detain, any property, to the prejudice of any person whatever with the intention of causing any person to enter into an agreement.

       It means that the act causing coercion should not necessarily be directed against the contracting party, it is enough that the act is to the prejudice of any person whatever, and with the intention of causing any person to enter into an agreement. If, for example, A unlawfully detains B's son, C, in order to coerce B to enter into the agreement, the case would be covered within this section. Apart from that, it is also not necessary that the wrongful act causing coercion should proceed from the party to the contract such as the case of Ranganayakamma v. Alwar Setti. 

A threat to strike is no coercion. Statutory compulsion is no coercion. In case of coercion not only the contract is voidable under Section 19 but if some money has been paid or goods delivered by a party to the contract under coercion, the same is recoverable under Section 72.

It was held by their Lordships of the Privy Council in the case of Seth Kanhaya Lal v. National Bank of India, Limited (1913) I.R. 40 I.A. 56, s. c. 15 Bom. L.R. 472 that the word "coercion" in Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act is used in its general and ordinary sense, its meaning not being controlled by the definition of "coercion" in Section 15 of the Act. 

Difference between Coercion and Duress

Coercion under Indian law is also synonymous with duress under Common law. However, there are some differences which are as follows:

• Coercion in India means committing or threatening to commit an act forbidden by the Indian Penal Code. Duress, under Common Law, consists of actual violence or threat of violence to a person. It includes doing an illegal act against a person, whether it be a crime or a tort. Thus, unlike coercion, duress is not confined to unlawful acts forbidden by any specific penal law, as the Indian Penal Code in India.
• In India, coercion can also be there by detaining or threatening to detain any person or property. In England, duress is constituted by acts or threats against the person of a man and not against his property.
• In India, coercion may proceed from a person who is not a party to the contract, and it may also be directed against a person who, again, maybe a stranger to the contract. In England, duress should proceed from a party to the contract and is also directed against the party to the contract himself, or his wife, parent, child, or other near relatives.  

MODEL NOTES FOR JUDICIAL EXAM - 99

1. A is accused of cheating B at a given time and place. The charge
    I. must set out the manner in which A cheated B
    II. need not set out the manner in which A cheated B

2. A is accused of disobeying a direction of the law with intent to save B from punishment. The charge
    I. must set out the disobedience charged and the law infringed
    II. need not set out the disobedience charged and the law infringed

3. Under Sec. 45 IPC, the word "life" denotes the
     I. life of a human being
     II. life of human and animal both

4. Which section of the Evidence Act deals with rule of res gestae?
     I. Sec. 7
     II. Sec. 6 

5. A sues B for a libel contained in a letter forming part of a correspondence. Letters between the parties relating to the subject out of which the libel arose, and forming part of the correspondence in which it is contained, are
    I. relevant facts, though they do not contain the libel itself
    II. not relevant fact

6. When there is a question whether a particular act was done, the existence of any course of business, according to which it naturally would have been done, is a relevant fact under 
    I. Sec. 16 Indian Evidence Act
    II. Sec. 17 Indian Evidence Act

7. Power of Court to convert summons-cases into warrant-cases
     I. Sec. 259 CrPC
     II. Sec. 260 CrPC

8. A causes Z to go within a walled space, and locks Z in Z is thus prevented from proceeding in any direction beyond the circumscribing line of the wall. A wrongfully confines Z
    I. under Section 340 IPC
    II. under Section 341 IPC

9. The person making the proposal is called the "promisor", and the person accepting the proposal is called the "promisee under 
    I. Sec. 2(c) of the Indian Contract Act
    II. Sec. 2(d) of the Indian Contract Act

10. An agreement enforceable by law is a contract under
      I. Sec. 2(h) of the Indian Contract Act
      II.  Sec. 2(i) of the Indian Contract Act

MODEL NOTES FOR JUDICIAL EXAM - 98

1. In criminal proceedings, the fact that the accused person has a bad character, is irrelevant, unless evidence has been given that he has a good character, in which case it becomes relevant
    A. Sec. 54 of Indian Evidence Act
    B. Sec. 64 of Indian Evidence Act

2. Whoever kidnaps any minor or, not being the lawful guardian of a minor, obtains the custody of the minor, in order that such minor may be employed or used for the purposes of begging shall be punishable with
   A. imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine
  B. imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine

3. Under Sec. 363 A IPC, "begging" means—
  A. soliciting or receiving alms in a public place, whether under the pretence of singing, dancing, fortunetelling, performing tricks or selling articles or otherwise
  B. entering on any private premises for the purpose of soliciting or receiving alms
  C. using a minor as an exhibit for the purpose of soliciting or receiving alms
  D. All of the above

4. Before the commencement of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, the transfer of immovable properties in India were governed by the:
     A. Principles of English law and equity
     B. Indian Registration Act, 1908

5. Enforcement of decree against legal representative
    A. Sec. 52 CPC
    B. Sec. 53 CPC

6. Where both the parties to an agreement are under a mistake as to a matter of fact essential to the agreement, the agreement is
     a. void
     b. voidable

7. A agrees to sell to B a specific cargo of goods supposed to be on its way from England to Bombay. It turns out that, before the day of the bargain, the ship conveying the cargo had been cast away and the goods lost. Neither party was aware of the these facts. The agreement is
    a. void
    b. voidable

8. A deed contains blanks. Evidence
    A. cannot be given of facts which would show how they were meant to be filled
    B. can be given of facts which would show how they were meant to be filled

 9.Secondary evidence means and includes
    A. Copies made from or compared with the original
    B. Counterparts of documents as against the parties who did not execute them
    C. Oral accounts of the contents of a document given by some person who has himself seen it
    D. All of the above

10. The seller is bound--
      a. to disclose to the buyer any material defect in the property or in the seller's title title thereto of which the seller is, and the buyer is not, aware, and which the buyer could not with ordinary care discover
       b. on payment or tender of the amount due in respect of the price, to execute a proper conveyance of the property when the buyer tenders it to him for execution at a proper time and place
     c. between the date of the contract of sale and the delivery of the property, to take as much care of the property and all documents of title relating thereto which are in his possession, as an owner of ordinary prudence would take of such property and documents
    d. to give, on being so required, the buyer, or such person as he directs, such possession of the property as its nature admits
      e. all of the  above

MODEL NOTES FOR JUDICIAL EXAM - 97

 1. A sells, by auction, to B, a horse which A knows to be unsound. A says nothing to B about the horses unsoundness. This is
     A. not fraud in A
     B. fraud in A

2. Presumption as to Gazettes, newspapers, private Acts of Parliament and other documents
     A. Sec. 81 Indian Evidence Act
     B. Sec. 91 Indian Evidence Act

3. A owes money to B under a contract. It is agreed between A, B and C, that B shall thenceforth accept C as his debtor, instead of A. The old debt of A to B is at an end, and a new debt from C to B has been contracted. Illustration belongs 
    A. Sec. 61 of Indian Contract Act
    B. Sec. 62 of Indian Contract Act

4. Sec. 91 of the Indian Evidence Act applies equally to cases in which the contracts, grants or dispositions of property referred to are contained in one document and to cases in which they are contained in more documents than one
     A. Explanation 1
     B. Explanation 2 

5. If a contract be contained in several letters, all the letters in which it is contained must be proved. True/False
    Ans: True (Illustration a Sec 91 Indian Evidence Act)

6. A gives B a receipt for money paid by B. Oral evidence is offered of the payment. The evidence
    A. is admissible
    B. is not admissible

7. Where a person who is in a position to dominate the will of another, enters into a contract with him, and the transaction appears, on the face of it or on the evidence adduced, to be unconscionable, the burden of proving that such contract was not induced by undue influence shall lie upon the person in a position to dominate the will of the other. True/False
    Ans: True

8. A, being in debt to B, the money-lender of his village, contracts a fresh loan on terms which appear to be unconscionable. It lies on B to prove that the contract was
   A. not induced by undue influence
   B. induced by undue influence

9. The maximum possible compensation awardable under section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-
     A. Depends on the Court in which the case is being tried
     B. Depends on the discretion of the judge

10. Admissions and confessions are exceptions to the hearsay rule. True/False
     Ans: True