Skip to content

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

Which of the following agreements would be void because its consideration or object is unlawful under Section 23?

The agreement to obtain public service employment for B in return for ₹1,000 is void, because Section 23 treats such consideration as unlawful. Child maintenance, a promise to pay on another's default with time granted, and ship-loss compensation are lawful considerations.

  1. AA promises to maintain B's child and B promises to pay A ₹1,000 yearly for it
  2. BA promises to pay a sum to B if C fails to pay B, and B promises to grant time to C
  3. CA promises to obtain employment in the public service for B, and B promises to pay A ₹1,000Correct
  4. DA promises to pay ₹1,000 to B for making good the value of B's ship if it is wrecked

Explanation

The illustration to Section 23 states that a promise to obtain public service employment for a payment is void because the consideration is unlawful. The maintenance of a child, a promise to pay on C's default with time granted, and a ship-loss promise are shown as lawful considerations.

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