CS Executive · Jurisprudence, Interpretation and General Laws · Contract Law
Meera agrees to sell her white horse to Karan "for Rs 500 or Rs 1,000". Nothing indicates which price was to be paid. Which statement is correct?
The agreement is void for uncertainty. Section 29 treats an agreement as void when nothing shows which of two alternative prices was intended. Neither party acquires a right to pick the price, so the meaning cannot be made certain and no contract arises.
- AThe agreement is valid and Karan may choose the lower price
- BThe agreement is void because its meaning is uncertain as to the priceCorrect
- CThe agreement is valid and Meera may choose the higher price
- DThe agreement is voidable at the option of Meera
Explanation
This matches the position under Section 29: the price alternatives are not resolved by anything in the agreement, so the meaning is not certain or capable of being made certain. The agreement is therefore void. Neither party gets a right to choose.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Contract Law shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Contract Law questions
- Vikram gives a continuing guarantee to a supplier for goods to be sold on credit to Dev. Vikram dies after some supplies, and the supplier c…
- Under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, which of the following sets out the conditions that make a person competent to contract?
- Neha guarantees repayment of a Rs 5,000 loan that Prakash will take from Qureshi on 1 March. Without Neha's consent, Qureshi pays Prakash th…
- Meena finds a purse containing cash belonging to Anil and returns it without being asked. Later, Anil orally promises to pay her Rs. 500 as …
- Under Section 21 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a mistake as to a law NOT in force in India is treated how?
- Ramesh, in Jaipur, promises in a casual conversation to gift Rs. 50,000 to his friend Suresh next month. Nothing is given or promised by Sur…