Skip to content

CMA Foundation · Fundamentals of Business Laws and Business Communication · Performance of Contracts

Which statement correctly distinguishes Section 67 from Section 38 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872?

Section 67 excuses a promisor whose non-performance was caused by the promisee's neglect to afford reasonable facilities, whereas Section 38 covers a promisor's valid offer of performance that the promisee refuses. Under Section 38 the promisor is not responsible and keeps contractual rights.

  1. ASection 67 deals with the promisee's failure to give reasonable facilities, while Section 38 deals with a promisor's offer of performance that the promisee does not acceptCorrect
  2. BSection 67 deals with accepting performance from a third person, while Section 38 deals with facilities
  3. CBoth sections require the offer of performance to be conditional
  4. DSection 38 applies only where the promisee has neglected to point out the place of performance

Explanation

Section 67 excuses non-performance caused by the promisee's neglect to afford reasonable facilities. Section 38 deals with a valid offer of performance that is not accepted; the promisor is not responsible and keeps his rights. Section 38 requires the offer to be unconditional, so the third and fourth options are wrong.

Did you get it right without looking?

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

Practise Performance of ContractsFree diagnostic mock

More Performance of Contracts questions