Alienation by the Karta without legal necessity or benefit of estate or in discharge of indispensable duty is :

Give correct response
An alienation made by the karta without legal necessity but with the consent of all other adult coparceners is:

A

Invalid

B

Void

C

Valid

D

Voidable

Give correct response
The alienation by Karta will not be considered as for the purpose of legal necessity?

A

Selling of the property for marriage of grand daughter

B

Selling of the property to discharge the debts of a close family friend

C

Selling of the property to purchase business machinery

D

Selling of an old house as he had insufficient income to support several family members

A partner cannot contract himself out of which of the following duties?
(1) Duty of utmost good faith, i.e. uberrimae fidei.
(2) Duty of carry on business to greatest common advantage.
(3) Duty to render true accounts and full information.
(4) Duty to indemnify for fraud.
(5) Duty to indemnify for willful neglect.
(6) Duty to properly use the firm's property.

A

(1), (2), (3) and (6)

B

(1), (2), (4) and (5)

C

(1), (2), (3) and (5)

D

(1), (2), (4) and (6)

When an alienation is made by the manager without legal necessity but with the consent of all other coparceners, they being all adults, is

A

Void ab initio

B

Void to the extent of the share of other coparceners

C

Valid in its entirety

D

Voidable at the instance of coparceners

Ramesh, karta of a joint property sold different properties to different persons on different dates. After the death of Ramesh, Suresh filed a suit joining all the purchasers as defendants and claimed that Ramesh transferred the properties when there was no legal necessity to do so. Purchasers claimed misjoinder of cause of action. Decide whether there is a misjoinder of cause of action.

A

Yes, there is a misjoinder of cause of action

B

No, there is no misjoinder

C

Facts are not sufficient to decide

D

None of the above

Give correct response
Which of the following sales of the joint family property made by the Karta of the Hindu Joint family could not be said for the legal necessity:

A

Payments of rent or Government revenue and debts binding on the family

B

A house of the joint family is sold to meet the expenses of appeal to defend one of the coparceners, convicted by the lower court, of a raping a minor girl and then killing her

C

Karta sold the dwelling house to meet the expenses of higher education of his second son. Karta, himself and his first sons are employed as peons in a Government Office

D

Sale of a part of joint family property to meet the expenses of the re-marriage of a widowed daughter

Give correct response
A sale of the joint family property made by the Karta of the Hindu Joint family could not be said for the legal necessity.

A

Karta mortgaged the jewels belonging to the family for obtaining money for the purpose of assisting prosecution of person accused of murder of his (Karta's) daughter

B

Karta, aged 45 years, sold some portion of ancestral property to perform his own second marriage

C

Both (A) and (B)

D

None of the above

If window received 1/3 of her hushand's estate, and each of her three sons received 1/3 of the balance. If the widow and one of her sons received a total of Tk. 360,000 from the estate, what was the worth of the estate in Tk?

A

540,000

B

576,000

C

648,000

D

none of these

A' sells to 'B' by deed my estate at Raipur containing 200 bighas. "A" has an estate at Raipur containing 200 bighas. Whether evidence may be given of the fact that estate meant to be sold was one situated at a different place and of a different size:

A

Yes

B

No

C

Inference should be drawn from the sale deed

D

Both A and C

Evidence Act - An estate called "the Rampore tea estate" is sold by a deed which contains a map of the property sold. The fact that land not included in the map had always been regarded as part of the estate and was meant to pass by the deed, this fact-

A

Can be proved

B

Cannot be proved

C

Proved by the court's permission

D

Proved as secondary evidence

Alienation by the Karta without legal necessity or benefit of estate or in discharge of indispensable duty is :

Related Questions