Specific Relief Act, 1963
| Description: Specific Relief Act, 1963 Quiz | |
| Number of Questions: 15 | |
| Created by: Aliensbrain Bot | |
| Tags: specific relief act, 1963 indian law banking and finance law |
What is the primary objective of the Specific Relief Act, 1963?
-
To provide remedies for breach of contract.
-
To enforce specific performance of contracts.
-
To grant injunctions to prevent irreparable injury.
-
To award damages for breach of contract.
The primary objective of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is to enforce specific performance of contracts, which means compelling a party to fulfill their contractual obligations.
Under what circumstances can a court grant specific performance of a contract?
-
When the subject matter of the contract is unique.
-
When the contract is for the sale of land.
-
When the contract is for the sale of goods.
-
When the contract is for the provision of services.
A court can grant specific performance of a contract when the subject matter of the contract is unique, meaning that it cannot be easily replaced or obtained elsewhere.
What is the difference between an injunction and a specific performance?
-
An injunction prevents a party from doing something, while specific performance compels a party to do something.
-
An injunction is a temporary remedy, while specific performance is a permanent remedy.
-
An injunction is granted to protect a legal right, while specific performance is granted to enforce a contractual obligation.
-
All of the above.
An injunction prevents a party from doing something, while specific performance compels a party to do something. An injunction is a temporary remedy, while specific performance is a permanent remedy. An injunction is granted to protect a legal right, while specific performance is granted to enforce a contractual obligation.
What are the grounds for granting an injunction?
-
To prevent irreparable injury.
-
To prevent a breach of contract.
-
To protect a legal right.
-
All of the above.
An injunction can be granted to prevent irreparable injury, to prevent a breach of contract, and to protect a legal right.
What is the difference between a mandatory injunction and a prohibitory injunction?
-
A mandatory injunction compels a party to do something, while a prohibitory injunction prevents a party from doing something.
-
A mandatory injunction is a temporary remedy, while a prohibitory injunction is a permanent remedy.
-
A mandatory injunction is granted to protect a legal right, while a prohibitory injunction is granted to enforce a contractual obligation.
-
None of the above.
A mandatory injunction compels a party to do something, while a prohibitory injunction prevents a party from doing something.
What is the doctrine of laches?
-
The doctrine of laches prevents a party from seeking relief if they have delayed in doing so.
-
The doctrine of laches is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of laches is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of laches prevents a party from seeking relief if they have delayed in doing so. The doctrine of laches is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.
What is the doctrine of acquiescence?
-
The doctrine of acquiescence prevents a party from seeking relief if they have consented to the breach of contract.
-
The doctrine of acquiescence is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of acquiescence is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of acquiescence prevents a party from seeking relief if they have consented to the breach of contract. The doctrine of acquiescence is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.
What is the doctrine of estoppel?
-
The doctrine of estoppel prevents a party from denying the truth of a statement they have previously made.
-
The doctrine of estoppel is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of estoppel is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of estoppel prevents a party from denying the truth of a statement they have previously made. The doctrine of estoppel is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.
What is the doctrine of frustration of contract?
-
The doctrine of frustration of contract excuses a party from performing their contractual obligations if an unforeseen event makes performance impossible or impracticable.
-
The doctrine of frustration of contract is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of frustration of contract is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of frustration of contract excuses a party from performing their contractual obligations if an unforeseen event makes performance impossible or impracticable. The doctrine of frustration of contract is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.
What is the doctrine of mistake?
-
The doctrine of mistake allows a party to avoid a contract if they entered into it under a mistake of fact.
-
The doctrine of mistake is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of mistake is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of mistake allows a party to avoid a contract if they entered into it under a mistake of fact. The doctrine of mistake is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.
What is the doctrine of undue influence?
-
The doctrine of undue influence allows a party to avoid a contract if they were pressured into entering into it by another party.
-
The doctrine of undue influence is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of undue influence is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of undue influence allows a party to avoid a contract if they were pressured into entering into it by another party. The doctrine of undue influence is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.
What is the doctrine of duress?
-
The doctrine of duress allows a party to avoid a contract if they were forced into entering into it by another party.
-
The doctrine of duress is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of duress is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of duress allows a party to avoid a contract if they were forced into entering into it by another party. The doctrine of duress is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.
What is the doctrine of unconscionability?
-
The doctrine of unconscionability allows a court to refuse to enforce a contract if it is found to be unfair or oppressive.
-
The doctrine of unconscionability is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of unconscionability is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of unconscionability allows a court to refuse to enforce a contract if it is found to be unfair or oppressive. The doctrine of unconscionability is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.
What is the doctrine of illegality?
-
The doctrine of illegality prevents a court from enforcing a contract that is illegal or contrary to public policy.
-
The doctrine of illegality is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of illegality is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of illegality prevents a court from enforcing a contract that is illegal or contrary to public policy. The doctrine of illegality is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.
What is the doctrine of impossibility?
-
The doctrine of impossibility excuses a party from performing their contractual obligations if performance is impossible or impracticable.
-
The doctrine of impossibility is a defense to a claim for specific performance.
-
The doctrine of impossibility is a defense to a claim for an injunction.
-
All of the above.
The doctrine of impossibility excuses a party from performing their contractual obligations if performance is impossible or impracticable. The doctrine of impossibility is a defense to a claim for specific performance and a claim for an injunction.