Skip to content

CMA Foundation · Fundamentals of Business Laws and Business Communication · Consideration and Legality of Object

Sunita promises to pay Rs 10,000 to Arjun if he will not sue her for a disputed debt, and Arjun agrees to abstain. Which view is correct under Section 2(d)?

Arjun's promise to abstain from suing, given at Sunita's desire, is valid consideration. Section 2(d) expressly includes abstaining from doing something, or promising to abstain, so a positive act is not required and no money value need pass.

  1. AArjun's abstinence from suing, made at Sunita's desire, is consideration for her promiseCorrect
  2. BOnly a positive act can be consideration, not abstinence
  3. CConsideration is absent because Arjun gave nothing of money value
  4. DConsideration exists only if the debt is proved valid in court

Explanation

Section 2(d) expressly lists 'abstains from doing' and a promise to abstain as forms of consideration. Arjun's forbearance was at Sunita's desire. Option B contradicts the text, and nothing requires the underlying claim to be proved valid.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Consideration and Legality of Object shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Consideration and Legality of ObjectFree diagnostic mock

More Consideration and Legality of Object questions