KSLU Contract I Past Questions & Exam Topics
KSLU Contract I Past Questions & Exam Topics
To crack the KSLU exam for Contract I, analyzing past trends is crucial. Below is a unit-wise breakdown of theory and problem questions compiled from KSLU semester papers.
How to read the map:
- ⭐⭐⭐ : Asked 5+ times — Must Cover
- ⭐⭐ : Asked 3–4 times — High Priority
- ⭐ : Asked 1–2 times
[16M]/[10M]: Essay marks[6M]/[SN]: Short notes / brief topics[Prob]: Solved problem fact patterns
📅 Unit 1 — Formation of Contract & Consideration
Topic-wise Questions
| # | Topic | Questions & Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | Definition, essentials & classification of contract; “all contracts are agreements but all agreements are not contracts” | [16M] Define contract / requisites of valid contract / classification — Jun2011(100), Dec2014(100), Jun2017(100), Jun2018(100), Nov2021(100); [10M] Nov2021(80); [16M] “All contracts are agreements…” explain — Jan2012(100), Dec2013(100), Jun2019(100), Dec2019(100), Dec2018(100); [10M] Jun2019(80), Feb2025(80); [16M] “An agreement enforceable by law is a contract” — Feb2025(100); [10M] Aug2024(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 1.2 | Offer / Proposal — definition, rules of valid offer, circumstances of lapse, invitation to offer, tenders | [16M] Define offer; rules of valid offer (decided cases) — Jan2011(100), Dec2015(100), Dec2016(100); [10M] Apr2023(80), Jan2026(80); [16M] Define proposal; when it lapses — Dec2020(100), Apr2021(100), Jun2016(100), Jan2026(100); [10M] Dec2018(80), Apr2021(80); [16M] Define offer; distinguish from invitation to offer — [10M] Nov2022(80); [16M] Offer & acceptance — can they be revoked? — Dec2017(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 1.3 | Acceptance — definition, rules of valid acceptance, communication & revocation, effect | [16M] Dec2012(100), Jun2011(100), Jun2013(100), Dec2018(100), Dec2019(100), Jun2015(100, offer & acceptance + revocation), Jun2025(100); [10M] Apr2022(80), Dec2019(80), Oct2023(80), Nov2022(80, revocation of acceptance) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 1.4 | Communication of proposal, acceptance & revocation — when complete | [16M] Jun2012(100); [10M] Oct2023(80) ⭐⭐ |
| 1.5 | Consideration — definition, essentials, Nudum Pactum, “an agreement without consideration is void” + exceptions, English v Indian law | [16M] “Agreement without consideration is void” + exceptions — Jan2011(100), Dec2016(100), Jun2015(100), Dec2020(100), Dec2019(100), Jan2026(100); [10M] Apr2022(80), Dec2018(80), Jun2019(80), Jan2026(80); [16M] Define consideration / essentials / exceptions — Jan2012(100), Dec2013(100), Dec2014(100), Jun2014(100), Dec2012(100), Jun2018(100), Feb2025(100), Apr2021(100), Dec2017(100); [10M] Apr2023(80), Aug2024(80, + English v Indian law) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 1.6 | Privity of contract & privity of consideration — doctrine, exceptions (“stranger to consideration may sue but not stranger to contract”) | [16M] Jun2013(100), Jun2014(100), Jun2016(100), Jun2019(100), Nov2021(100); [10M] Nov2021(80), Feb2025(80), Jan2026(80); [SN] Privity of contract — Dec2015(100), Oct2023(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 1.7 | Unlawful consideration & its effect; when object/consideration becomes unlawful | [16M] When does object/consideration become unlawful — Nov2021(100); Legality of object & consideration — Jun2018(100) ⭐⭐ (legality of object also overlaps Unit 2) |
| 1.8 | E-contract | [SN] E-Contract — Dec2014(100) ⭐ |
| — | Short notes asked on Unit 1 topics | [SN] Invitation to offer — Jun2017(100), Dec2018(100), Nov2021(100); General offer — Jun2015(100), Dec2017(100), Aug2024(80); Counter offer — Jun2019(100); Acceptance — Dec2016(100), Jan2026(100); Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. — Dec2018(100); Free consent (see Unit 2) — Jun2025(100); Void agreements (see Unit 2) — Jan2026(100) |
| 1.9 | Tenders | (never asked) — syllabus topic; cover briefly under offer |
Application Problems (all papers)
Every fact-pattern problem touching Unit 1 (formation/consideration), from both 80- and 100-mark sittings. Look-alikes merged into one row with neutral labels (A, B, C …) and all years listed; the planted decoy is flagged.
| Year(s) (paper) | Problem summary (neutral labels, with the decoy) | Key issue |
|---|---|---|
| Jun2014(100), Dec2015(100), Jun2016(100), Dec2018(80), Apr2021(80) | A posts a proposal/acceptance; the other party posts acceptance then revokes by speedier telegram that arrives before/with the acceptance letter. Decoy: the later revocation telegram. | Postal rule — completion & revocation of acceptance (S.4–5) |
| Jun2011(100), Dec2018(80), Dec2019(80), Apr2023(80), Nov2021(80), Jun2018(100), Jun2019(80) | A picks an article/book with price tag in a self-service/departmental store; shopkeeper refuses to sell at the counter; A sues for breach. Decoy: the displayed price tag “looks like” an offer. | Display of goods = invitation to offer, not offer |
| Oct2023(80), Jun2012(100), Dec2013(100) | A announces in conversation he will give ₹X to whoever marries his daughter; B marries her and claims the reward. Decoy: it was said “in conversation” / marriage as consideration. | General offer & its acceptance by performance |
| Dec2012(100), Jun2014(100), Nov2022(80), Apr2022(80), Jun2019(100), Jun2018(100) | A’s son/boy is missing; A announces a reward by pamphlet/declaration; a servant/finder who is unaware of the reward finds and returns the boy and claims it. Decoy: finder had no knowledge of the offer. | General offer — knowledge of offer needed to accept (Lalman Shukla) |
| Jan2012(100), Aug2024(80), Jun2013(100), Apr2022(80), Nov2022(80), Apr2021(80), Feb2025(80) | A sells property/car/horse/TV worth a large sum for a token price; A/seller later questions or refuses the sale for inadequate consideration. Decoy: inadequacy of consideration. | Inadequacy ≠ void; consideration need not be adequate (Expl. 2 to S.25) |
| Jan2011(100) | A, out of natural love and affection, promises his son ₹1,000 under a registered document. Is it a valid contract? Decoy: absence of consideration. | Exception to S.25 — registered promise out of natural love & affection |
| Jan2011(100) | A agrees to sell his Luna for “₹4,000 or ₹5,000”; friend agrees to buy. Decoy: the alternative price. | Certainty of terms (S.29) |
| Jan2012(100) | A in Mumbai phones B in Bangalore offering to sell a car; due to a telephone-line defect A does not hear B’s acceptance. Decoy: B believing acceptance complete. | Communication of acceptance — instantaneous communication |
| Jun2019(80) | A made a proposal in Jun 2017; B “accepts” it in Aug 2018. Decoy: the long gap. | Lapse of offer by unreasonable delay (S.6) |
| Dec2019(80), Nov2021(80), Apr2023(80), Jan2026(80) | A invites friends to dinner/party, spends money on arrangements; friends fail to attend; A sues to recover expenses. Decoy: money actually spent. | Social/domestic agreement — no intention to create legal relations |
| Jun2013(100) | Husband promises wife ₹3,000/month household allowance; later defaults; wife sues. Decoy: the promise in writing/relationship. | Domestic agreement — intention to create legal relations (Balfour) |
| Dec2014(100) | On divorce a husband promises his wife a yearly permanent alimony; in reliance she forbears to apply to court for maintenance; he defaults and she sues. Decoy: “promise without consideration”. | Forbearance to sue is good consideration |
| Dec2018(100) | After repeated quarrels a husband by a registered deed agrees to give his wife a house and a car, then declines, pleading no consideration; wife relies on the S.25 exception. Decoy: absence of consideration. | S.25(1) exception — written & registered promise out of natural love & affection |
| Dec2018(100) | X parks a car at a paid parking lot, gets a slip; the music player is stolen by breaking the door; the company relies on “cars parked at owner’s risk” printed on the slip. Decoy: the printed exemption clause. | Notice of an exemption clause / bailee’s duty of care |
📅 Unit 2 — Capacity, Free Consent, Legality & Contingent Contracts
Topic-wise Questions
| # | Topic | Questions & Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 2.1 | Capacity to contract — who are competent (incl. Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose) | [16M] Who are competent? Discuss effects of minor’s agreement — Jan2012(100), Jun2015(100), Dec2015(100), Dec2016(100); [10M] Nov2021(80); [16M] Capacity — principle in Mohori Bibee — Jan2012(100); [10M] Aug2024(80); [16M] Contractual capacity of minors in India (decided cases) — Feb2025(100); What is capacity to contract — Dec2012(100); [10M] Provisions relating to capacity — Dec2019(80), Apr2022(80), [16M] Jan2026(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 2.2 | Minor’s agreement and its effects | [16M] Effects/legal effects of minor’s agreement — Jun2017(100), Nov2021(100); [10M] Dec2018(80), Jun2019(80), Apr2023(80), Feb2025(80), Jan2026(80); [16M] Minor’s agreement is void ab initio (decided cases) — Dec2018(100); [SN] Position of a minor to make a contract — Jun2018(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 2.3 | Persons of unsound mind & persons disqualified by law | [SN] Position of a person of unsound mind to make a contract — Dec2019(100) ⭐ (also tested via “necessaries to a lunatic” problems below) |
| 2.4 | Free consent — meaning; when consent is said to be free | [16M] Jun2012(100), Jun2014(100), Apr2021(100), Dec2020(100), Jun2019(100); [10M] Nov2022(80), Feb2025(80); Free consent + distinguish fraud/misrepresentation — Jun2017(100); [SN] Free consent — Jun2025(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 2.5 | Coercion (incl. distinction from undue influence) | [16M] Define coercion; how it differs from undue influence — Jun2011(100); [10M] Oct2023(80); What is coercion? effect on consent (decided cases) — Jun2015(100); [SN] Coercion — Dec2017(100) ⭐⭐ |
| 2.6 | Undue influence | [16M] Define undue influence; distinguish from coercion — Dec2012(100); Law relating to undue influence (decided cases) — Jun2013(100) ⭐⭐ (+ distinction asked under 2.5) |
| 2.7 | Misrepresentation | [16M] Define misrepresentation & fraud; distinguish — Dec2019(100); [SN] Misrepresentation — Jun2011(100); [10M]/[SN] Oct2023(80) ⭐⭐ |
| 2.8 | Fraud (incl. silence as fraud; distinction from misrepresentation) | [16M] What is fraud? essential elements (does silence amount to fraud) — Jun2013(100), Dec2018(100); [10M] Apr2022(80); [16M] Define fraud; distinguish from misrepresentation — Dec2013(100), Dec2016(100), Jun2025(100), Dec2017(100); [10M] Dec2018(80); Free consent — elements of fraud, leading cases — Jan2012(100); [10M] Aug2024(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 2.9 | Mistake | [16M] Define misrepresentation, fraud & mistake; distinguish — Dec2014(100); [10M] Effect of mistake on legality of contract — Dec2019(80) ⭐ |
| 2.10 | Legality of object & consideration; doctrine of public policy | [16M] Doctrine of public policy — Jan2011(100), Dec2015(100), Jun2019(100); Legality of object & consideration — Jun2018(100); [SN] Unlawful object — Jun2016(100) ⭐⭐ |
| 2.11 | Void agreements (restraint of trade, wager, etc.) | [16M] Agreement in restraint of trade is void (+ exceptions) — Jun2017(100), Dec2018(100), Jun2018(100), Dec2020(100); [10M] Jun2019(80), Nov2021(80), Apr2023(80), Nov2022(80), Dec2019(80); [16M] Agreements declared void in ICA — Jun2011(100); [10M] Oct2023(80); Agreements by way of wager are void — Dec2013(100); What agreements are void / void ab initio — Jun2015(100), Jun2014(100); [SN] Void contract — Feb2025(100); Agreement by way of wager — Jun2014(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 2.12 | Contingent contracts | [16M] What is contingent contract? rules of enforcement/performance — Feb2025(100); [10M] Apr2021(80), Jan2026(80); Contingent v wagering agreement — Dec2017(100), Nov2021(100); [SN] Contingent contract — Jun2014(100), Aug2024(80), Jun2025(100), Nov2021(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
Application Problems (all papers)
| Year(s) (paper) | Problem summary (neutral labels, with the decoy) | Key issue |
|---|---|---|
| Jan2012(100), Aug2024(80), Dec2012(100), Jun2015(100), Jan2026(100) | A, a minor, falsely represents he is a major and buys goods / executes a mortgage on credit; the other party sues to recover the price/money. Decoy: the false representation (estoppel). | Minor’s agreement void ab initio; no estoppel against a minor |
| Jun2017(100), Jun2018(100) | A, a minor, executes a promissory note; on attaining majority he executes a fresh promissory note / further loan for the same/added debt; can the lender sue on it? Decoy: ratification of a minor’s debt. | Minor’s contract void; fresh promise after majority needs fresh consideration |
| Jan2011(100) | A, a minor, lends ₹1,000 against a promissory note executed in his favour; is the borrower liable? Decoy: the lender being a minor. | A minor may be a promisee/beneficiary |
| Apr2021(80), Jun2025(100), Dec2020(100), Dec2019(80), Feb2025(80) | A, a minor (~16 yrs), agrees to sell a scooter / buys a watch / is supplied a mobile on credit, then refuses to pay/perform; other party sues to recover price. Decoy: recovering price from the minor; the article as a “necessary”. | Minor’s agreement void; price not recoverable; non-necessaries |
| Jan2026(80), Feb2025(80) | A shopkeeper supplies necessaries (food/rice/medical) to the wife & children of B, a lunatic, and sues B to recover the price. Decoy: the lunatic’s personal incapacity. | S.68 — reimbursement for necessaries from incapable person’s estate |
| Jun2019(80), Apr2022(80), Dec2012(100) | A spiritual advisor induces an old/devout disciple to gift the whole of the property to secure spiritual benefit; disciple later seeks to cancel. Decoy: the gift being “voluntary”. | Undue influence (S.16) — dominant position |
| Jan2026(80) | A (student) sells an article worth ₹50,000 to B (teacher) for ₹25,000, then seeks to set aside for undue influence. Decoy: mere inadequacy of price. | Undue influence — student/teacher relationship of trust |
| Jan2012(100) | A applies to a banker for a loan in a money-market crunch; banker lends only at an unusually high rate of interest; A accepts. Decoy: high interest = undue influence. | No undue influence absent a dominating relationship (S.16) |
| Jun2011(100), Oct2023(80), Nov2021(100) | A threatens suicide unless his wife transfers her personal property (to him / to his brother); she does so under threat and later wants to avoid it. Decoy: suicide threat not being an IPC “offence”. | Coercion (S.15) — threat of suicide (Chikham Amiraju) |
| Nov2021(80), Apr2023(80), Feb2025(80) | A kidnaps B’s son and threatens to kill him unless B signs a contract/sale deed; B signs and later wants to set it aside. Decoy: the signature actually made. | Coercion — consent not free; contract voidable |
| Jun2012(100), Jan2026(100) | A sells by auction a horse he knows to be unsound and says nothing to the buyer about it. Decoy: mere silence as fraud. | Caveat emptor; silence not fraud unless duty to speak (S.17) |
| Dec2019(100) | Seller describes a car (“left rear-view mirror broken”) but in fact the right mirror is broken; buyer seeks to avoid for misrepresentation. Decoy: the innocent mis-statement. | Misrepresentation v immaterial error; effect on consent |
| Dec2017(100), Apr2023(80), Jun2019(80) | A contracts with B to kill / assault C for a sum; B performs; A refuses to pay; can B recover? Decoy: B having performed. | Unlawful object — agreement void (S.23) |
| Jun2011(100), Dec2012(100) | A promises to pay B ₹1,000 if B beats C; B beats C; A refuses to pay. Decoy: B’s performance. | Unlawful consideration — void (S.23) |
| Apr2021(80), Dec2013(100), Jun2012(100) | A agrees to pay B monthly wages partly for household service and partly for an immoral (adulterous) relationship; B performs; A refuses. Decoy: the lawful-service portion. | Immoral consideration — whole agreement void (S.23/24) |
| Jun2016(100), Dec2013(100), Nov2022(80), Nov2021(80) | A and B agree that A pays B ₹X if it rains on a fixed day, else B pays A; it rains; can the winner recover? Decoy: the event actually happening. | Wagering agreement — void (S.30) |
| Nov2022(80) | A, B and C agree to share among themselves gains acquired by fraud. Is the agreement valid? Decoy: it being a mutual arrangement. | Unlawful object — void (S.23) |
| Jun2012(100), Jan2026(100) | A promises to pay B a sum if a certain ship does not return within a year; the ship never returns; can B recover? Decoy: whether it is a wager. | Contingent contract — enforceable on the event (S.32) |
| Dec2019(80) | A agrees to pay B ₹5,000 if B’s house is destroyed, but B has no house. Decoy: the contingency. | Contingent agreement on an impossible event — void (S.36) |
| Dec2019(80) | A and B, before marriage, agree to live separately after marriage. Is it valid? Decoy: mutual consent. | Agreement opposed to marital duties — void (public policy) |
| Dec2019(80) | A pays B ₹5,000 and B must settle/arrange the marriage between A and a lady. Is it enforceable? Decoy: the money paid. | Marriage-brokerage agreement — void (public policy) |
| Dec2017(100) | Rosy’s husband agrees to buy her a necklace or she leaves him; they divorce in 3 months; can she enforce? Decoy: the promise made. | Marital/domestic agreement — no enforceable contract |
| Dec2018(100) | Three telecom operators fix a base price and a penalty for undercutting; one undercuts; others sue. Decoy: the agreed penalty clause. | Agreement opposed to public policy / restraint of trade — void |
📅 Unit 3 — Discharge & Performance of Contracts
Topic-wise Questions
| # | Topic | Questions & Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 3.1 | Modes of discharge of contract (overview) | [16M] Explain the various/different modes of discharge — Jun2013(100), Jun2018(100), Jun2025(100), Jan2026(100); [10M] Jun2019(80), Nov2021(80), Nov2022(80), Apr2023(80), Oct2023(80), Feb2025(80); How can a contract be discharged? — Jun2019(100); “Performance is not the only mode in which a contract is discharged” (decided cases) — Feb2025(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 3.2 | Time and place of performance | [16M] Law relating to time & place of performance — Dec2017(100); [10M] Jun2019(80), Apr2023(80); [SN] Time for performance — Jan2012(100); Time & place of performance — Dec2012(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 3.3 | Performance of reciprocal promises | [16M] What are reciprocal promises? order of performance — Dec2013(100); [SN] Reciprocal promises — Jun2015(100) ⭐ |
| 3.4 | Appropriation of payments | [16M] Rules of appropriation of payments (debtor/creditor) — Jun2011(100), Jun2012(100), Dec2012(100); [SN] Appropriation of payment — Jun2017(100), Apr2022(80), Nov2021(80), Aug2024(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 3.5 | Discharge by agreement (novation, alteration, rescission, etc.) | [SN] Novation — Dec2014(100); Discharge of contract by agreement — Apr2021(80); Assignment of contract — Jan2012(100) ⭐⭐ |
| 3.6 | Discharge by operation of law | [SN] Discharge of contract by operation of law — Oct2023(80) ⭐ |
| 3.7 | Frustration / impossibility of performance (doctrine of frustration, S.56) | [16M] Doctrine of frustration (decided cases) — Jan2011(100), Jan2012(100), Dec2013(100), Jun2016(100), Nov2021(100), Jun2025(100); [10M] Apr2021(80), Apr2022(80), Oct2023(80), Aug2024(80), Jan2026(80); [16M] Impossibility of performance — critically examine / grounds / exceptions — Jun2012(100), Jun2013(100), Jun2014(100), Dec2014(100), Dec2017(100), Dec2015(100, supervening impossibility); [16M] What is frustration? specific grounds — Jun2014(100); [SN] Doctrine of frustration — Dec2012(100), Jun2019(100), Jun2018(100); Impossibility of performance — Apr2023(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 3.8 | Breach of contract — anticipatory and actual; kinds of breach | [16M] What is breach? distinguish actual & anticipatory — Jan2011(100), Jun2017(100); [10M] Dec2018(80); [16M] Anticipatory breach — consequences/effects/how differs from actual — Jan2012(100), Dec2012(100); [10M] Apr2022(80), Nov2022(80), Aug2024(80); [16M] State effects of anticipatory breach — Jun2014(100), Dec2016(100); [10M] Apr2023(80), Jan2026(80); [16M] Kinds/types of breach — Nov2021(100); [10M] Nov2021(80), Jan2026(80, modes of breach) ⭐⭐⭐ |
Application Problems (all papers)
| Year(s) (paper) | Problem summary (neutral labels, with the decoy) | Key issue |
|---|---|---|
| Jun2013(100), Dec2016(100), Dec2020(100), Jun2016(100), Apr2021(80), Nov2022(80), Apr2023(80), Jun2019(80), Feb2025(80), Jan2026(80) | A promises to marry B on the death of his father, but marries another woman while the father is still alive; B sues for breach. Decoy: the contingency (father’s death) not yet having occurred. | Anticipatory breach of a (contingent) promise to marry |
| Jan2011(100), Dec2017(100), Oct2023(80), Apr2022(80), Dec2018(80), Nov2022(80) | A agrees to let out a hall / Kala Bhavan on a fixed day; before the day it is destroyed by fire; is the promisor absolved? Decoy: the concluded agreement. | Frustration by destruction of subject-matter (S.56; Taylor v Caldwell) |
| Jun2014(100), Jun2019(80), Dec2020(100), Feb2025(100) | A agrees to sell a house/car/truck; it is destroyed by accidental fire before sale/delivery; buyer sues for breach/damages. Decoy: buyer’s claim for damages. | Frustration — no liability; agreement to do an impossible act |
| Jan2012(100) | A hires rooms to view the Dasara procession; an earthquake causes the procession to be cancelled; owner claims rent. Decoy: the rooms still being available. | Frustration of purpose (Krell v Henry) |
| Dec2019(80), Feb2025(80) | A, a famous singer, agrees to sing in B’s programme but dies before it; can B compel A’s son C to perform? Decoy: substituting the heir. | Frustration by death in a personal-skill contract (S.56) |
| Dec2019(80), Nov2021(80), Feb2025(80) | A, a dancer, agrees to perform but falls ill / loses both legs in an accident and cannot; B sues for breach. Decoy: B’s breach claim. | Supervening impossibility — personal incapacity discharges the contract |
| Dec2013(100) | A agrees to sell a scooter to B “a month later” but sells it to C after 10 days; B sues; A pleads he could repurchase from C. Decoy: the offer to repurchase. | Anticipatory breach |
| Dec2018(80), Jun2014(100), Jun2019(80) | A agrees to deliver goods on a fixed day, time being the essence, and fails; the other party rescinds and sues for damages (in one variant the buyer must close his factory). Decoy: whether time was the essence. | Breach where time is the essence; remedies on breach |
| Jun2012(100) | A owes B several debts including ₹500; B demands payment; A sends ₹500 — how is it to be appropriated? Decoy: the unspecified debt. | Appropriation of payments (S.59–61; Clayton’s case) |
| Jan2011(100), Jun2011(100), Aug2024(80), Nov2021(100) | A, B and C jointly promise to pay D a sum; one promisor is insolvent / untraceable; can D recover the whole from the others? Decoy: each promisor’s “share”. | Joint & several liability of joint promisors (S.43) |
| Jun2011(100) | Unloading of a ship is delayed beyond the agreed date due to a dock-labour strike; owners are met with a plea of impossibility. Decoy: the strike as “impossibility”. | Commercial hardship is not frustration |
| Jan2012(100) | X agrees to sell 100 bags of paddy he will grow; a pest attack leaves him only 50 bags; rights & duties of X and Y. Decoy: the shortfall. | Partial impossibility / contingent supply of specific crop |
| Feb2025(100) | A and B contract to marry each other; before the fixed time A becomes insane; is the contract enforceable? Decoy: the existing valid contract. | Supervening incapacity frustrates a personal contract (S.56) |
| Dec2019(100) | A buys a movie ticket two days ahead; the theatre wall collapses in heavy rain and the show is cancelled; the ticket says the price is non-refundable; can A recover the price + damages? Decoy: the “non-refundable” printed term. | Frustration — restitution of benefit (S.65); effect of exemption clause |
📅 Unit 4 — Remedies for Breach & Quasi Contracts
Topic-wise Questions
| # | Topic | Questions & Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 4.1 | Remedies available for breach of contract (overview) | [16M] Various/what remedies are available for breach — Jun2012(100), Dec2017(100), Jun2025(100), Jan2026(100); [10M] Jun2019(80), Nov2022(80), Apr2022(80), Aug2024(80), Feb2025(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 4.2 | Damages — kinds (general/ordinary & special, nominal, exemplary) | [16M] General & special damages (decided cases) — Jun2014(100); [10M] Dec2018(80), Dec2019(80), Jun2019(80); [16M] Different kinds of damages — Jun2019(100); [10M] Apr2023(80); [SN] General & special damages — Dec2016(100); Special & liquidated damages — Nov2021(80); Nominal damages — Dec2018(80), Dec2013(100); Exemplary damages — Jun2011(100); Measure of damages — Nov2022(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 4.3 | Liquidated damages & penalty (S.74) | [16M] Law relating to liquidated damages under ICA / “object is to remedy loss not penalise” — Dec2018(100); [10M] Apr2021(80); [SN] Liquidated damages & penalty — Jun2013(100), Jun2016(100), Apr2022(80), Apr2023(80), Dec2018(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 4.4 | Remoteness of damages (Hadley v. Baxendale) | [16M] Principle/rules of remoteness; Hadley v Baxendale & applicability in India; distinguish general/special — Jan2011(100), Jan2012(100), Jun2017(100), Dec2012(100), Feb2025(100); [10M] Oct2023(80); [SN] Rule in Hadley v Baxendale — Apr2022(80), Jan2026(100); Remoteness of damages — Jun2012(100), Jun2013(100), Nov2022(80), Aug2024(80), Jan2026(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 4.5 | Ascertainment/assessment of damages; “damages are compensatory and not penal” | [16M] “Damages are compensatory and not penal” — principles of assessment — Jan2011(100), Dec2014(100), Dec2015(100); [10M] Oct2023(80); Principles governing assessment of damages — Jun2011(100), Jun2013(100); Law relating to damages under ICA — Dec2020(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 4.6 | Quasi contracts — relations resembling contract; types; unjust enrichment; finder of goods; quantum meruit | [16M] What is quasi contract? types / when liability arises — Jun2012(100), Jun2014(100), Dec2016(100), Jun2016(100), Nov2021(100), Jan2026(100); [10M] Aug2024(80), Nov2021(80), Apr2022(80), Nov2022(80); [16M] Relations resembling those created by contract — Dec2012(100), Jun2018(100); Unjust enrichment / Lord Mansfield’s dictum — Jun2013(100), Dec2014(100), Dec2019(100); [16M] Rights & liabilities of finder of goods — Dec2013(100); [10M] Finder of goods & duties — Dec2019(80); [SN] Quasi contract — Dec2017(100), Dec2018(100), Oct2023(80), Apr2023(80); Quantum meruit / suit upon quantum meruit — Jun2011(100), Dec2012(100), Dec2013(100), Feb2025(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
Application Problems (all papers)
| Year(s) (paper) | Problem summary (neutral labels, with the decoy) | Key issue |
|---|---|---|
| Jan2011(100), Dec2012(100), Jun2014(100), Oct2023(80), Apr2021(80), Jun2025(100), Feb2025(100), Jun2019(100) | A leaves a packet of fruits/chocolates at B’s house by mistake; B consumes them and refuses to pay; can A recover the value? Decoy: the goods reaching B “by mistake”. | Quasi-contract — obligation to pay for non-gratuitous benefit enjoyed (S.70) |
| Dec2013(100), Jun2019(80), Apr2023(80) | A leaves an umbrella/article at B’s house by mistake (B uses it but it survives); can A recover the article? Decoy: B’s use of it. | Finder/bailment — recovery of goods in specie |
| Jun2015(100) | A postman/sender delivers a parcel to the wrong house; it belongs to C; B refuses to return it; liability of A and B. Decoy: the delivery “mistake”. | Finder of goods / duty to return (S.71) |
| Jun2014(100), Apr2021(80) | A pays sales-tax / income-tax by mistake of law which he was not bound to pay; can he recover it? Decoy: “mistake of law” not being recoverable. | Money paid by mistake — recoverable (S.72; Sales Tax Officer v Kanhaiya Lal) |
| Nov2021(80) | A, a tenant, pays the municipal tax which the landlord B failed to pay, to avoid the house being auctioned; can A recover from B? Decoy: A not being the owner. | Reimbursement to a person interested in payment (S.69) |
| Jun2012(100), Dec2015(100) | A finds B lying unconscious on the road and arranges/pays for a doctor/hospital; B later refuses to pay; right to be paid? Decoy: the help being “voluntary”. | Quasi-contract — necessaries / non-gratuitous act (S.68/70) |
| Jan2011(100) | A mate engaged for a lump sum payable after the voyage dies when only 2/3 of the voyage is complete; his legal reps claim on quantum meruit. Decoy: the “payable on completion” term. | Quantum meruit on part performance (Cutter v Powell) |
| Nov2021(80) | X agrees to pay Y ₹1,00,000 if he fails to supply goods worth ₹20,000; X fails; can Y recover the full ₹1,00,000? Decoy: the stipulated sum. | Liquidated damages v penalty — only reasonable compensation (S.74) |
📅 Unit 5 — The Specific Relief Act, 1963
Topic-wise Questions
| # | Topic | Questions & Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| 5.1 | Nature of specific relief; discretionary remedy | [16M] “Specific relief is a judicial discretionary remedy” — comment — Jan2011(100), Dec2013(100); Jurisdiction to award specific relief is discretionary — Nov2021(100); Generally pecuniary damages is the remedy; specific relief as extraordinary remedy — Dec2019(100); What is specific relief? — Jun2018(100); [SN] Specific relief — Jun2013(100), Jan2012(100); [10M] Nov2022(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 5.2 | Recovery of possession of movable & immovable property (S.5–8) | [16M] Provisions relating to recovery of movable & immovable property — Jun2015(100); [10M] Apr2022(80); [SN] Recovery of possession of immovable property — Jun2014(100), Jun2017(100); [10M]/[SN] Recovery of (im)movable property — Dec2018(80), Dec2019(80), Apr2023(80), Jan2026(80), Feb2025(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 5.3 | Specific performance — when granted, who may obtain & against whom | [16M] By whom & against whom SP can be claimed — Jun2013(100), Jun2025(100); [10M] Apr2021(80), Apr2022(80); [16M] What is SP? who can claim it — Dec2012(100); [10M] Jun2019(80), Feb2025(80), Nov2022(80); Under what circumstances court can grant SP — Jun2019(100); Who may obtain SP under SRA — Jan2011(100); SP of part of a contract; grounds for denial — Dec2014(100); [SN] Specific performance — Jun2012(100), Dec2012(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 5.4 | Contracts which can / cannot be specifically enforced | [16M] Contracts which can be specifically enforced — Dec2015(100), Jun2016(100), Jun2018(100); [10M] Dec2018(80), Dec2019(80), Apr2023(80), Jan2026(80); [16M] Contracts which cannot be specifically enforced — Jun2011(100), Dec2016(100), Feb2025(100); [10M] Oct2023(80), Aug2024(80), Nov2021(80); What contracts can be specifically enforced under the Act — Jan2012(100); [SN] Contracts not specifically enforceable — Dec2020(100), Apr2022(80), Nov2022(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 5.5 | Rectification of instruments (S.26) | [16M] Jurisdiction of court to grant relief by rectification — Jun2012(100), Jun2013(100); [SN] Rectification of instruments — Jan2011(100), Dec2012(100), Apr2021(80), Oct2023(80), Jun2025(100) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 5.6 | Cancellation of instruments (S.31–33) | [16M] Provisions relating to cancellation of instruments — Jan2012(100); [10M] Nov2021(80); [SN] Cancellation of instrument(s) — Dec2019(80), Apr2023(80), Jan2026(80), Feb2025(80), Aug2024(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 5.7 | Declaratory decrees (S.34–35) | [SN] Declaratory decree(s) — Jun2014(100), Dec2018(80), Oct2023(80), Aug2024(80), Feb2025(100); Declaratory relief — Nov2021(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
| 5.8 | Preventive relief — injunctions (temporary, perpetual, mandatory); when refused | [16M] Kinds of injunctions as preventive reliefs under SRA 1963 — Dec2018(100), Dec2019(100); [10M] Aug2024(80); What is injunction? circumstances court can/can’t grant — Jun2019(100, perpetual via Q7), Jun2025(100); [10M] Apr2021(80), Apr2023(80), Nov2022(80), Jan2026(80); Perpetual & temporary injunctions — Jun2019(80), Feb2025(80); Circumstances court cannot/may refuse to grant (perpetual) injunction — Jun2014(100), Dec2013(100), Dec2018(80), Jan2026(100); Principles for granting temporary injunction — Jun2011(100); Preventive reliefs / kinds of injunctions — Jun2017(100); [SN] Injunction — Jun2015(100), Jun2016(100), Jun2019(100), Nov2021(100); Temporary injunction — Dec2012(100), Jun2013(100), Dec2014(100); Perpetual/Permanent injunction — Jun2011(100), Dec2012(100), Dec2013(100); Mandatory injunction — Dec2013(100); Preventive relief — Jun2012(100), Oct2023(80) ⭐⭐⭐ |
Application Problems (all papers)
| Year(s) (paper) | Problem summary (neutral labels, with the decoy) | Key issue |
|---|---|---|
| Apr2021(80), Jun2019(80), Jun2017(100) | A is the owner of a building; B dispossesses A by force; advise A. Decoy: taking the property back by self-help. | Recovery of possession of immovable property — suit under S.6 SRA |
| Jan2011(100), Jun2019(80), Dec2014(100), Nov2021(80) | B, a medical advisor, threatens to publish a patient’s confidential communications showing an immoral life (or demands money under that threat); advise the patient. Decoy: treating it only as defamation/damages. | Preventive relief — injunction to restrain breach of confidence (S.38/41) |
| Nov2021(100) | A contracts to sell land to B for ₹50,000, then sells the same land to C for ₹60,000, who has notice of the earlier contract; B sues C for specific performance. Decoy: C being a purchaser. | SP enforceable against a subsequent transferee with notice (S.19(b) SRA) |
| Dec2019(100) | A agrees to sell an ancient/antique motor car; buyer (a collector) pays a large advance; A declines and offers a refund + penalty, but the buyer insists on the car itself. Decoy: the offer of money compensation. | SP of movable where damages are inadequate / unique goods (S.10 SRA) |
💎 Get Exam-Ready Solved Answer Banks
Looking for model answers to all these questions? Get the Contract I Notes + Question Bank Bundle containing full 16-mark essay blueprints and solved IRAC problems for all previously-asked KSLU questions!