Civil Law I

Haryana Civil Servcie (Judicial)
Examination 2003
Civil Law Paper  -  I
Time : 3 Hours                                                                                                                                                         Maximum Marks : 200
Note  :  All question are compulsory.  Answer all of them.

Q.  1.(a)  Define Counter Claim.  Distinguish between counter claim and setoff.
(b)  The plaintiff delivered one thousand bags of potatoes to the defendant, the cold storage proprietor on certain conditions for preservation.  The defendant did not fulfil all those conditions and thereby committed breach of contract.  The plaintiff filed a suit for damages.  The defendant filed counter claim.
Discuss the effect of the counter claim in the light of statutory provision and decided cases.
Q.  2.(a)  What should a court do when plaintiff is present and the defendant is absent ? What remedies are available to defendant in such case ?  When can an ex parte decree be passed and when it be set aside?
(b)  What are the consequences of plaintiff's failure to appear when the defendant is present  ?  What remedy is available to plaintiff  ?
Q.  3.(a)  Explain in detail the different modes of execution of a decree under Civil procedure Code.
(b)  'A' obtains a decree against 'B' for Rs. 10,000.  Subsequently, 'A' agrees to accept Rs. 7,000 in full satisfaction of the decree and 'B' pays Rs. 7,000 out of court, but neither the payment not the adjustment is certified by the court.  'A' applies for execution of the full amount of the decree notwithstanding receipt by him of Rs. 7,000.  'B' objects to the execution on the ground that the decree has been adjusted and the payment has been made.  Discuss.
Q.  4.(a)  Admissions cannot be proved by the persons making them.  What are the exceptions to this general rule  ?
(b)  A is accused of receiving stolen goods knowing them to be stolen.  He offers to prove that he refused to sell them below their market price.  Is this evidence admissible  ?  Give reasons for your answer.
Q.  5.  Section 133 of the Indian Evidence Act says that 'An accomplice shall be a competent witness against an accused person and a conviction is not illegal merely because it proceeds upon the uncorroborated testimony of the accomplice whereas Section 114 IIIustration (b) says : 'The court may presume that an accomplice is unworthy of credit, unless he is corroborated in material particulars.'
Q.  6.  (a)  How far is it true that an agreement without consideration is void?
(b)  The plaintiff, a minor, mortgaged his house in favour of the defendant, a money-lender, tto secure a loan of Rs. 80,000.  A sum of Rs. 20,000 was actually advanced to him.  While considering the proposed advance the legal adviser, who was acting for the money-lender, received information that the plaintiff was still a minor.  Subsequently, the minor commenced this action stating that he was under age when he executed the mortgage and the same should, therefore, be cancelled.  Decide and refer to decided cases.  What would be your answer if the plaintiff was a major and mortgaged his house in favour of the defendant, a minor, to secure loan and a part of the amount was actually paid in advance  ?
Q.  7.(a)  Discuss the principles on which the court would award damages for breach of contract.
(b)  'P' carried on an extensive business as millers.  His mill was stopped by a breackage of the Crankshaft by which the mill was worked.  'D' was engaged to carry the shaft to the manufacturers.  P's servant told 'D' that the mill was stopped and that the shaft must be sent immediately.  But 'D' delayed delivery resulting into heavy loss to P.  The action was brought for the loss of profits which would have been made during the period of delay.  Decide and refer to relevant judicial pronouncements.
Q.  8.(a)  Distinguish between sellers' right of lien and stoppage of goods in transit.
(b)  'X', left his motor car with a mercantile agent and authorized him only to receive offers and not to sell.  The agent obtained the possession of the registration book without X's consent and quickly sold the car to the defendant, 'Z', can 'Z' acquire a good title to it  ?  Discuss.