Delhi Judicial Services 2012: Delhi Judicial Service Main Examination (Written) 2011, all papers
Text of page 1
.b v .c. IE" cvw-. - '-" \. I
GENERAL KNOWLEDGE AND LANGUAGE
TIME DURATION: 3 HOURS MAXIMUM MARKS - 250
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
This question paper comprises of two parts i.e. Part·A and part·B. Candidates.should answer
Part·A and Part-B questions In ~eparate answer she ets. If any question of Part-A 15 attempted
In Part-S answer sheet or vice versa, it would not be evaluated.
"
(PART-A)
GEN ERAL KNOWLEDGE
Q.No.l. Write short notes of not more than 150 words on any t wo of the fo llowing topics: . '
(Marks SO)
0) Dress Code -An ~nswer to crime agai nst women?
b) Socia l Responsibility of the med ia.
0) Global is the new \local.
dl Any o b solet~ lawlstatute that requires change.
el Need fo r Gender Sensitization in Law Enforcement.
Q.No.2; Give one/two word answers:- (Marks 10)
a) Wh at ha s the UN declared 2012 as the year of?
b) Name the first Britisp Fort established in India?
. cl Who is the youngest ever Indian Grandmaster in chess?
d) Wh ich are the two termi nal points of Nationa l·High way 1 (NH1)?
e) Who has composed a "'Sachi n Ar them"?
f) What does "hoi polloi" refer to?
g) With which game is the Azlan Shah Cup Tourname nt 2ssociated?
h) Which instrument was Ustad Zia Mohiu ddin Dagar an exponent of?
i) Who w on the Best Actor (Male) Oscar Award for 2011?
j) In wh ich country are the Machu Picchu ruin.s Ipcated?
..
Q.No.3. With what are the following associated? (G ive one/two line answer) (Marks 10)
a) Latest proposed amendment to t he Registration of Births and Death Act, 1969
b) Auroville
c) Majuli
d) Tum blr
e) Impression ism
f) Bhimb. tka
g) Constantinople
hi Graphology
i) Spectrome ter
j) Privilege motion
Page 1 of 4
-.
Text of page 2
Q.I. o.4. Who wrote t he followin g?
" . (Marks 10)
•
a) Autobiograp hy of an Unlmown Indian.
bl Human Rights Inhuman Wrongs.
c) From Green to Evergreen Revo lution .
dJ Pari neeta .
e} The Republic.
I) Hot , Fl at and Crowded.
g) law and Justice.
hI We, t he Nation.
iI Everybody Loves a Good Dro ught .
j) The Argumentative Indian.
Q.No.S. In what connectio n have t he following been in news:- (M arks 10)
al Hasni M ubarak
b) GAAR
c) I(oothankulam
d) Wheeler Island
e} Sigur Elephant Corridor
a.No.6. Describe what each of th e f ollow ing are famous f or:- (Marks 10)
al Ma rk Spitz
bl Mohamma d Vo nus
c) Burhan uddin Rabbani
d) Cornelia Sorabj i
el Pandit Birju Mah a raj
Page2 of 4
-.
~------------~------
Text of page 3
(PART-B)
LANGUAGE
,
Q.No.l. Write an essay of not more than 1000 words on anyone of the following topics:-
(Marks 50)
a) Internet Censorship in India.
b) Challenges in provid ing food security through PDS.
e) Debates on Natural Resource Commons.
d) Is India Really Shin ing?
e) RTE - Government obligation or responsibility of private institutions?
Q.No. 2. Make a pre cis of not more thim 200 words of the follow ing passage: (Marks 35)
The contrast in nineteenth - century social theory between 'civil society' and
'state' although used in a lIariety of ways, broadly suggesterl D clear distinction between,
on the one hon d, a civil realm of social relations governed by private transactions
between individuals based on the concepts of controct and private propt'rty and, on the
other, Q political realm in which the members of society are recognized as citizens with
relations defined by reference to political orga"ization anrl political obligation. It·drew a
relatively clear line between private and publjc spheres of social fife: and between
relationships based on the free pursuit of individual self interest and relationships
structured through state power and control. The idea, present in San to;' writings, that
the distinction betwl.?en state and civil society, ar political and private realms of social
fije, is breaking dowr; is a familiar one in recent social theory.
This perceived breakdown is described in many differen t ways. Some writings,
like Santos', emphasizes the extension 0/ the reach of the state into the private sphere
through the use of informal devices harnessing what remains of struct~res of comm unity
life (for example, mediation or neighbourhood organizations) in the service of political
control. The French Marxist philosopher Louis Althusser developed the influential thesis
of the stote acting through what he termed 'Ideological State Apparatuses' (lSAs) which
are to be understood as for more extensive and pervasive than the parallel repressive
apparatuses of rhe state (police, military organizations etc.). Althusser sees the state
(and - in more concrete terms - those .who wield political power within it) as exerting or
capable of exerting ideological control over soc/ety by means of direct or ,indirect
influence on a great variety of institutions: churches, education, rhe f amily, political
parties and organizations, trade unions, the media, cultural institutions, as well as the
law (wh ich Althusser sees, in conformity with tile tradition of Marxist analysis, as
simultaneously an ideological and repressive apparatus of the state ). To this extent all
of thes~ institutions, which are traditionally associoted wholly or ,Dortly with civil society,
are ISAs. The state works or can work, through them, caordinoting their effects so as to
guarantee the main tenance of the established social and ('wnomic order.
The extension of state power and control by formal and infcmnal means is a
theme of much Marxist writing. One of the most important recent contributions to the
analysis of power hos been of the French scholar Mich el Foucault. Wflile much social
theory links power specifically with the state o· with economic relations, Foucault sets it
free as a general concept applicable in the anolysis of all social structures and relations.
Different kinds of institutions-schools, factories, prisons? hospitals, armies - have
different ins titutional objectives but are related by common 'technique:. of discipline' -
that is, modes of orglanization and control of individuals ~nd their behaviour - which are . , .,
fundamentally uniform in character despite the variety of institutions in which they exist.
Page 3 of 4
-.
Text of page 4
',.
Existing in this very general form, power is in no way limited to that which is'
expressed through law. This kind of thinkitJg encourages a recognition that power can .
be expressed within the state in numerous forms of administration and surveillance.
We lfare administration and coptrol, and the organizotion of family fife can be
interpreted as some of many fields in which power is dispersed and yet ordered within
the state's 'allerolf strategy'. Foucault's approach casts doubt on any possibility of
maimoining a clear analytical separ.ation of SOciety into a public and a private realm.
Q.No.3. Translate the follo wing passage into Hindi: (Marks 351
I
If one is thinking of ways' of making a difference in the Jives of one biflion plus Indians '.
then a start can only be made if intellectuals realize the many prablems~ and constraints,
of things as they are. If they tao buy intol the populor myths then there is no way to
make a difference. Of course, we need better infrastructure, better schools, hospitals,
roads, energy' provisions.. housing and water. ·j Everybady knows that, but why is fittle
done towards making such public goods available? Among other reasons, it is because
in tellectuals have shied away from calling a spade a spade and have sided with one or
the other popular constructions of reality. .
.
, '
a.No.4. Translate the./allawing passage into English ;- (Marks 3D)
'~ ~ "fl 5'1 ~ ~ ~ 3I'R 3lJlf ~ 314RRld~ <iT '
" '
~ <tiEI ~'li ~ I 3I'R 3lJlf ~ <tiE l ~ 'l1 <!iT m;<T '1tf
ClR" tI i!><'1 tIT litl i!>1 3f!mrm t 1$ "'lil" ~ 3TifI1iI t, ~
, '
'iIT' lR'l1 ~, cf ~ ~ q\)" lR'l1 ~, ~ ~<!l'1 1) ~ ~
,,
'1tf, fGttl <Ii) ~ "IT'! "fl tI kI ~d f<l;m \ffiGT t % q 1't<1 q 1)
~ tI'1l\J1 <i>T ~ t I ~ 31~I\JI<tid l '1tf tl lEdl I ~ m'lfl
ct f<lill~1 1) \3t1Gl'11 tGr <ti~'11 '1tf tl lllti,l I fj '\'!'tI' 'ti'l<llRi
, , '
am ~ am tI'1lG1 q\)" Tffi;ft, 'flri ida !'i" II, 'iIT '¥ 1ft
.
*ft t, ~ ;;"fl ~
'
46'11'1 q\)" <f<li)i'tf~~I~ 'lj'\ '1tf i!>~(1I '
. '. I
lltlR:!~ f<I; <16 ..m 1ffIlI '1tf GR;j'l1 <i>T t I i.'IPT ~ '
<>mr i!><1 '1 ~ t <'1 fiV'1 ~ <>mr <rOOr If{ ~ iIW>"fl , "
'1tf R:! mil I " tI ~ c: iIW> <i>T ,,<R1 '11 <1 ~ tI R:! q i!> ~dl t f<I;
<ru<IT-<>mr q\)" 'flI1 if! am ~ ~ ~ ,'
Page4of4
-,
Text of page 5
CRIMINAL LAW
nME DURAn ON ,3 HOURS MAXIMUM MARKS - 200
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
This question paper comprises of two parts i.e. Part-A and Part-B. Candidates should answer
Part-A and Part-B questions in separate answer sheets. If any question of Part-A Is attempted
in Part-B answer sheet or vice versa, it would not be evaluated.
(PART-AI
(SECTION -I)
Answer anyone question
Q.No. l: 'J' an Indian doctor was having a live in relationship with 'R' a U.S. citizen of
Indian origin. Since '1' was reluctant to marry 'R', the relationship between the two strained . 'J'
and 'R' to patch up the differences went for a holiday to Australia and reached there on
25 th January 2010 at the Marina Hotel, Sydney at 9 a.m. Soon thereafter both went out for
sightseeing and came back to the hotel at 10 p.m. They had dinner together in the room . On
the next day morning at 7 a.m. when 'J' got up, 'R' was not in the room . He made enquiries
from the hotel staff and nearby. Since he could not trace out 'R' he checked out of the hotel at
11 a.m. He went to Boston and informed the parents of 'R' about her missing from the hotel
room . Without lodging any report either in Sydney or Boston, he comes back to India. ' R" s
parents go to Sydney and lo dge a report with the po lice. Investigation is thus taken up after a
week of 'R' missing. From the bathroom attached to the room of Marina Hotel where 'J' and 'R'
stayed, reddish blood stains of blood group 'A' are recovered . Further finely chopped parts of a
woman aged 20·30 years suggesting an Anglo Indian Origin are recovered from a rubbish bin in
the city of Sydney within 200 metres of Marina Hotel. Parents of 'R' come t racing 'J' to India
where he is found hiding at a farm house in Delhi. On an FIR being lodged for offence under
Section 302 IPC, 'J' is tried for the same.
Case of prosecution:
a) 'R' was last seen alive in the company of '1';
th
b) 'J' floated the false defense that 'R' left him in the morning of 26 January 2010;
c) 'J' did not lodge any comp laint to Sydney police;
d) Body parts were recovered from a rubbish bin only 200 metres away from Hotel Mari na;
e) The body parts were identified to be that of ' R';
f) The blood group of blood stains found in the bathroom matched the blood group of 'R'
and
g) 'J' remained abscond ing for a period of two years.
Case of defense:
a) No motive of alleged crime has been proved;
b) Mutilation of the body was possible only by surgical instruments and not by a butter
knife or a fork. There is no evidence that 'J' had access to any surgical instrument;
c) The hypothesis of 'J' committing murder in the bathroom is ruled out as no employee or
guest of the hotel has seen 'J' taking parts of the body out of the hotel;
d) Hypothesis of guilt is further ruled out as 'J' himself informed the parents of 'R' about
her missing and
e) 'J' had not absconded and had merely come back to his house in India as he could not
live without ' R' at Boston.
Pagelof4
Text of page 6
Write a judgment concerning the guilt or otherwise of the accused, discussing the rival
contentions in relation to the circumstances that have emerged, citi ng the statutory provisions
and case law. (Marks 75)
OR
Q.No.2: Accused 'A' doing M.A. Ancient History in the year 2008 was staying at University
Hostel. On 31.12.2008 'R' the Hostel Warden was returning from lunch at about 01:00 p.m. 'A'
reported to him that 'M' and 'N ' two other inmates of the hostel abused him by using the word
HGoonda H. On 'R' making an enquiry both 'M' and 'N' replied in the negative, despite 'A'
repeatedly asserting that they insulted him. 'A' also informed 'R' that on the previous night
also there was heated discussion between 'A' on the one side and 'M ' and 'N' on the other side.
'P' the cook after finishing the work in the mess was relaxing on the cot . At this point of time
he saw 'A' coming towards the door. 'A' was wearing a half T-shirt and lungi. The cot of'M'
was near the door. ' A' took out a knife which was hidden in the lungi and stabbed 'M' on the
right side of the chest. On witnessing the incident 'P' was shocked and shouted at 'A' as to why
he was doing it. On hearing the shouts of 'P' people came in and apprehended 'A' on the spot.
'M' was taken to the hospital where he succu mbed to the injury. As per ' D' the doctor who
conducted the post mortem there was no other external injury except the stab injury caused by
the knife . The injury was opined to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause
death. After investigation a chargesheet is filed against 'A' for offence punishable under
Section 302 IPC in view of the ocular evidence of~ . 'A' took the defence of sudden and grave
provocation . P
Write a judgment acquitting/convicting 'A' for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC
taking into consideration all legal and fa ctual issues with discussion thereon citing statutory
provisions and case law. (Marks 75)
(SECTION -II)
Answer anyone question
Q.No. 3: 9 persons put a house on fire at 9:00 p.m. on 3rd July 2009 shouting slogans
against the owner of the house for ravishing a woman on the previous night. 'X' a 20 year old
person suffering from 40% physical disability, whose sister was ravished the night before, wa s
standing with those nine persons . On a neighbor informing the pol ice, the PCR van reaches the
spot, while the other nine persons were burning the house. 'X' saw the PCR van coming from a
distance and thus warned them . The nine persons putting the house on fire ran away. When
the PCR van reached the spot 'X' was found .
Pass an order on charge relying on the relevant judgments and frame charge if any made out
against 'X'. (Marks 25)
OR
Q.No. 4 (a): 'X' Times a leading English daily prints an article aimed at creating hatred and
enmity between two groups of people i.e., a capitalist and the labour class. The article read:
"'B' and the Chief Minister of the State who were good friends have conspired together and
acquired 100 hectares of fertile land belonging to the loca l farmers for Special Economic Zone .
To persuade and coerce the farmers not to challenge the acquisition 'B' got burnt the houses of
the farmers and their standing crops through his henchmen. The promises of 'B' that he will
employ the local youth is also false as 'B' is getting youth trained from the constituency of the
Chief Minister who would be employed in the various Indu stries to come up in the SEZ area" .
Page 2 of 4
Text of page 7
Can the reporter, editor, printer, and publisher of 'x' Times be charged for offence under
Section lS3A IPC. Give reasons. (Marks 12.5)
AND
(b) '5' a sai nt was passi ng through the jungle near the river, where he saw the dead body of
a man lyi ng with multiple stab wound s and a knife near the body. '5' petrified at the ghastly
sight of the body felt that he was duty bound to pray for the nirvana of the departed soul. He
took the body to the river flowing by the side of the jungle. He put the body on the bank of the
river and performed puja for the peace of the departed soul and moved forward toward his
destination . In the meantime due to a high tide in the river the dead body got washed away in
the river water. On the next day when the police reached they found the knife and the blood at
th e spot of murd er in th e jungle. They also saw a trail of blood on the path from which the
saint had taken the body to the river side. From the place wh er e the saint performed th e puja
his book bea ring his name and the slippers of the decea sed which the saint had removed before
performing puj a were r ecovered .
Ca n '5' be charged for offence under Section 2011PC? Give reasons. (Marks 12.5)
Page 3 of 4
Text of page 8
(PART-B)
Write a short note, Not exceeding 150 words} on any four of the following topics:
(Marks 25 .ach)
(Note : Welghtage will be given whenever case law is cited.)
aJ Procedure to be followed and precautions to be taken by a Magistrate while recording
confeSSion s under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 .
b) Principles governing the award of compensation under Section 357 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973.
c) Plea Bargaining.
dJ Admissibility of finger print evid ence.
e) Options available to a Magistrate when a closure/cancellation report is filed by the
invest igating agency in a criminal case.
f) Principles governing the grant of anticipatory bail.
Page4of4
Text of page 9
CIVil LAW ·1
TIME DURATION: 3 HOURS MAXIMUM MARKS - 200
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
This question paper comprises of two parts i.e. Part-A and Part-B. Candidates should answer
Part-A and Part-B questions in separate answer sheets. tf any question of Part-A is attempted
in Part-B answer sheet or vice versa, it would not be evaluated.
(PART-A)
Questions No. 1 & 2 are compUlsory. The candidates may attempt any two questions out of
questions No.3 to 6.
Even if you do not know the answer, you may attempt the questions as the test is not only of
knowledge of law but of the candidate's analytical skill also.
Q.No. 1. Kanika agreed to sell iii plot of land measuring 200 sq . yards to Pradeep for a
consideration of rupees ten lakh s by an agreement 'X' executed on 01.01.2000. Th e agreement
begins as "Agreement for Sale between Kanika and Pradeep" an d end s " in witness whereof the
parties have hereunto set and subscribed their res pective hands and seals on these presents".
On that very day a sum of rupees one lakh is paid as earnest money for which a separate
receipt is executed and signed by Kanika . The sale was .to be com pleted within a period of six
months after obtaining all clea rances from t he DDA. A furth er su m of rupees one lakh wa s paid
on 02.02.2000 and an endorsement was made on t he ea rlier receipt. Kanika refused to execute
the sale deed and denies t he agreement 'X'. She says that her signatures were obtained on a
blank paper. 'x' does not bear signatures of Prad eep. Kanika pleaded that since 'X' was not
signed by Pradeep there was no concluded contract between the parties. Though th e receipts
for rupees two lakh s were denied, but the same were proved. Kanika was unable to prove the
circumstances under which she signed a blank paper. A suit is filed by Pradeep for specific
performance of the contract.
Whether th e agreement is valid and binding? Decide and write a·judgment with case law, if
any_ (Marks 25)
Q.No. 2. 'H', the husband entered into an agreement to sell with the plaintiff for sale of a
house for Rs. 1.10 crores. The vendee (the plaintiff) paid a sum of Rs. 11 lakhs as earnest
money and the remaining amount of Rs. 99 lakhs was to be paid at the tim e of execution and
registration of the sale deed . The vendor' s wife 'w' sent a notice t o the vendee as well as t he
vendor 'H' calling upon them to cancel th e agree ment as she was owner of one half share
having devolved upon her on death of her son. In the notice she stated that she was not willing
to sell her share and was ready to purchase the share of th e vendor 'H'. The vendee replied
that th e agreement was binding on her and the notice had been given in collu sion with the
vendor 'H'. The vendee files a suit for specific performan ce.
Decide. (Marks 25)
Q.No.3(a}. Explain doctrine of frustration or impossibility. Give illu strations. (Marks 12.5}
(b). Discuss exceptions to the rule of 'Caveat Emptor'. {Marks 12.5}
Page 1 of 4
,
Text of page 10
Q.No.4(al. 'A' is an outgoing partner of th e firm ABC. By an agreement between all the
partners, 'A' was prohibited from carrying on business, carried on by the firm within the
National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Whether the agreement is in restraint of trade? Can the agreement be enforced by the
continuing partners? (Marks 12.5)
(bl. A partnership firm opened a bank account. The account was to be operated by
'N and another partner jointly. No authority was given to 'A' to act as an agent of the firm . ' A'
executed an acknowledgement in favou r of t he bank . Is the firm bound by acknowledgement
given by 'A'?
Discuss. (Marks 12.5)
a.No. 5(al. A promissory note was signed by a minor for consideration received by him. On
attaining majority, he ratifies that promissory note. Can the creditor enforce it?
Explain. (Marks 12.5)
{bl. In an auction of liquor shop by th e State, the highest bid is offered by 'A' but he
fails to deposit the prescribed minimum amount with in the stipulated period and the bid is not
accepted. In re-auction, the amount fetched is less than what was offered by'A'. The State files
a suit for damages against 'A' for breach of contract to recover the loss suffered by it. 'A'
contests the suit denying his liability.
Decide. (Marks 12.5)
a.No.6(a). A share broker having sold shares of a Company in Bombay handed to the buyer
th e share certificates together with blank transfer deeds signed by the registered holder. Th e
buyer gave a cheque for the price, the cheque was dishonoured on presentation and the buyer
failed to pay the price. The buyer in the meanwhile sold the shares to the respondent and
handed over to him the certificates and transfer deeds. The seller sued the buyer and the
respondent for return of the certificates and transfer deeds and for damages. Decide with
reference to the sect ion(s) of the Sale of Goods Act, and case law, if any. (Marks 12.5)
(bl. 'A' is tenant under ' B' on an agricultural land. 'B' was in arrears of land revenue
payable to the Government. The land is put to sale by the Government. Consequent upon sale
taking place, lease in favour of 'A' was liabl e to be annulled under Revenu e laws. In order to
avoid the land being put to sale, 'A' pays land revenue arrears to the Government. Can 'A'
recover the amount from 'B'?
Discuss. (Marks 12.5)
Page 2 of 4
,
Text of page 11
(PART-B)
Answer only two questions from each Section I, II. III and IV. Wherever necessary. answer
with reference to statutory provisions as also case law, if any.
(SECTION-II (ANSWER ANY TWO)
Q.No.1. 'H', a divorcee, married 'W' in the year 2005. 'H' discovers in the year 2008 that
'W' was already married to 'N' in London and had married him without obtaining divorce from
'N', 'H' alleges that 'W ' never informed him regarding the previous marri age. Immediately, in
the year 2008 'W ' obtains a decree of nullity of marriage with 'N'.
What is the legal status of the marriage of 'H' and 'w' and a daughter born during their
wedlock? Would it make any difference to the legal status of their marriage and their daughter,
if 'W' obtained a decree of divorce instead of a decree of nullity against 'N'? (Marks lS)
a.No.2. 'H' files a petition against wife 'W' for divorce on the ground of adultery. 'w'
files a petition against 'H' seeking restitution of conjugal rights . During the pendency of both
th e petitions, 'H' and 'w' mutually resolve to get separated by mutual consent and move for
conversion of petition filed by 'H' seeking divorce to seeking divorce by mutual consent.
Can they also move for conversion of petition seeking restitution of conjugal rights to one
seeking divorce by mutual consent? What according to you are the requirements to be satisfied
for grant of divorce by mutual consent? (Marks lS)
a.No. 3 Section 6 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 dea ls with devolution of interest in
Coparcenary Property amongst the members of the Coparcenary. (Marks 15)
(i) What do you understand by Hindu Mitakshara Coparcenary?
(ii) What are the rights and liabilities of the daughters in Hindu Mitakshara
Coparcenary Property?
(iii) Can a daughter make a will of coparcenary property ?
(SECTION-II) (ANSWER ANY TWO)
Q.NO.4. Under Delhi Rent Control Act, a tenant can be evicted where he has buitt,
acquired or has been allotted residence. 'A' let out suit premises to'S' for residential purpose
in October, 2005. On or about 2008, B's wife was allotted a government flat due to her
employment. A year after, 'A' sues 'B' for eviction on the ground of 'B' having acquired a
residence.
Would it make any difference if B had built a residential hou s~ with his own savings? (Marks IS)
a.No.S. 'A' let out his premises to 'B' vide a written agreement for the purpose of a guest
house for the officers of th e company of 'B'. The premises was used for considerable time for
guest house, but later on, it wa s also used as company's office . 'A' filed a petition under
Section 14 (1) (e) read with Section 25 (B) of Delhi Rent Control Act for bona fide requirement
of said premises for his residen ce and that of his family members comprising of his wife, aged
parents and two self employed grown up marriageable age sons. The respondent contested
alleging the purpose of letting it be for office purpose and the petitioner not requiring the
premises for residence for himself or that of his family members, he being in possession of five
bed room accommodation on the first floor of the same premises.
Discuss. (Marks 15)
Page 3 of4
Text of page 12
a.No.6. A landlord lets out his premises to a tenant for the purpose which is contrary to
the terms of perpetua l lease granted by DDA. DDA threatens to cancel t he lease on the ground
of misuse. Can landlord seek eviction of tenant under Section 14 III (k) of the Delhi Rent
Control Act?
What defence is open to the t enant in such a case?
Discuss. (Marks 15)
(SECTION-III) (ANSWER ANY lWO)
a .No.7. The defendant tenant was carrying on business in shoes and had stored in a
store room combustible material. Some of his workers used to smoke ciga rettes and biris in the
premises itself. Fire broke out causing substantial damages to the building which was about
eighty yea rs old. One worker also sustained serious injuries. Discuss his liability, if any, towards
the owner of the building and the injured worker. (Marks 10)
a.NO.B. There is a distinction between Tort and Crime, but there are various wrongs
which find place both under Criminal law and law of Torts .
Comment. (Marks 10)
a.NO.9. Though, the concept of Tort is essentially based on the principle of Equity and
Justice, but the essence of tortious liability lies in violation of legal right .
Discuss . (Marks 10)
(SECTION-IV) (ANSWER ANY lWO)
a.No.lO. How, what and from whom a Muslim woman can claim maintenance for herself
and chi ldren? Whether, she would be entitled to mainten ance for herself and children after a
divorce from husband?
Explain. (Marks 10)
Q.No.ll. What are the essential requirements of a valid gift or 'Hiba' under Muslim law in
the case of ancestral and self acquired propert ies, movable or immovable?
Explain. (Marks 10)
a.Ho.12. 00 you agree that marriage in a Muslim law is a civil contract? What are the
rights of a minor girl married by her guardian? What is th e Muslim law on the subject"?
Discuss. (Marks 10)
Page4of4
Text of page 13
CIVIL LAW -II
TIME DURATION : 3 HOURS MAXIMUM MARKS - 200
IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS
This question paper comprises of two parts i.e. Part-A and Part-B. candidates should answer
Part-A and Part-B questions in separate answer sheets. If any question of Part-A is attempted
in Part-B answer sheet or vice versa, it would not be evaluated.
(PART-A)
(SECTION -I'
Answer any two of the questions given below
Q.No.l. For an immovable property situated at Kanpur a su it is filed for specific
performance in Ja ipur on the ground that th e agreement was executed in Jaipur, and where
both the proposed buyer and seller resided and worked for gain. The suit is contested and
decreed by the court at Jaipur and the appeals against the decree are dismissed right upto the
Supreme Court. In execution proceedings the defend ant/ju dgm ent debtor takes up the
objection that the decree is nutl and void as the same is passed by a court which did not have
inherent jurisdiction as the court which had inherent jurisdiction was only the civil court at
Kanpur.
(I) Under what provision the objection is filed to the execution of the decree and
will it succeed, if so why?
(ii) What would be your answer if the plaintiff/decree holder contends that the
objection raised by the judgment-debtor is an objection not to the inh erent jurisdiction of the
court but only qua the territorial jurisdiction and which stands waived then what would be the
provision of (P( which would be relied upon by the decr ee holder? (Marks 2S)
Q.No.2. (a) A summ ary suit, as different from a regular suit, is filed for recovery of money. The
suit is filed on the basis of a cheque of Rs. 2S lacs which was issued by the plaintiff in favour of
the defendant and which cheque was encashed on presentation . Since the amount was not
paid on the due date by the defendant a suit for recovery of moneys was filed claiming the
principal amount of Rs . 2S lacs and interest @ 18% p.a. for the pre-suit period as also claiming
such interest pendent e lite and after passing of the decree till realisation .
(b) In this suit the defendant did not put in appearance after service and hence the suit
was decreed for failing to file appearance for an amount of Rs. 25 lacs with pre-suit interest and
also interest at the same rate pendente lite and future till realisation .
(c) The defendant thereafter files an application under O. 9 R 13 (PC to set aside the ex
parte decree on the ground that the service was not validly effected inasmuch as he had shifted
from the place where the summons were served of the suit. No other averment is made in the
application for setting aside the ex parte decree except that the defendant was not served in
the suit although on merits the defendant had an excellent case because he had repaid the
amount due to the plaintiff with interest two months before the summary suit was filed by
means of a chequ e which was en cashed by the plaintiff.
(i) A su mmary suit is filed under which provision of (PC and in such a suit can the
court which passed the ex parte decree pass a decree for payment of interest till
realisation?
Page 1 of 8
Text of page 14
(ii) Was the suit maintainable as a su mma ry suit or should the suit have been fil ed
only as an ordinary suit?
(iii) Did the defendant validly invoke the provision of O. 9 R. 13 CPC and if not, under
which provision, the application would lie, and can the cou rt suo mota treat the application as
fil ed under th e correct provision of law, jf yes, how?
(Iv) In addition to pleading the factum of non-service what else had the defendant to
pl ead in an application to set aside the ex parte decree an d under whi ch provision? (Marks 25)
Q.No.3. Plaintiff-Madan 8hai, the son, files a su it for declaration aga inst his mother Smt.
Sushila Bai-defendant, claim ing ownership right s in the property 1- Go lf links, New Delhi (su it
property) on the ground that the suit property was actually purchased from the funds provided
by M ad an Bhai, though the sal e deed is in the name of Smt. Sushila Sal. In an earlier suit filed
by Smt. Meera Devi, th e wife of Madan 8ha; against M adan Bhai for right of residence in the
suit property, Madan 8hai had filed a written statement stating that the suit property was of his
mother Sushila Devi and th erefore the su it property was not a matrimonial home or a shared
household in wh ich Smt. M eera Devi could claim a right of residence. This ea rlier suit filed by
Smt . Meera Devi was thu s dism issed as the house was held not to be a matrimonial home or a
shared household. In Madan 8hai's suit Smt. Sushila Devi files an application for dismissal of
the suit even before issues are framed by filing a certified copy of the written statemen t filed by
M adan ahai in the suit filed by Smt. M eera Devi and which showed that Madan ahai admitted
the suit property to be owned by Smt. Sushi/a BaL
(il Give your decision on such application including by stating the applicable
provision of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) ?
{ii} In your decision deal with the argument urged by Madan Bhai in his reply that
the application of Smt. Sushila Sai canno t be decided unless evidence is led by both the parties
and that an application for decreeing the suit can on ly be fil ed by a plaintiff and not a
defendant. (Marks 25)
Q.No.4_ Facts: (a) A su it for possession (1st Suit) was filed by one Chiranji lal in 1975 again st
Mohan and Sohan with respect to the suit property 10-Aurangzeb Road, New Delhi pleading
ownership und er a sale deed dated 31.1.1974 from late Jai Ram, th e father of the defendants
Sohan and Mohan. In th is plaint Chiranji lal pleaded that Jai Ram had purchased the property
on 1.1.1974 vid e a sale deed from Sh. Om Shastri. Mohan in his written-statement states that
the sale deed by Jai Ram in favour of Chiranji lal is void for lack of consideration. Schan in this
suit pleaded in his written statement that actually he was the owner of the su it property
because he had purchased the suit property earlier on 1.1.1973 from Om Shastri - t he very
person from whom his father Jai Ram had purchased the su it property on 1.1.1974. This suit
filed by Chiranji lal where both Sohan and Mohan were defendants is not decided as on
1.1.1980 .
(b) On 31.1.1980 Moh an f iles a suit against his brot her Sohan for partition of the suit
property 1D-Aurangzeb Road, New Delhi (2 nd suit). Partition is claim ed as the father Jal Ram
was the owne r under a sale deed dated 1.1.1974 and that since Jai Ram died inte state Sohan
and Mohan were equal co-owners by inheritan ce. Decla ration is also sought in this suit against
Chiranji lal that Chiranji lal is not the owner of the suit property as the sale deed in his favour
was void on accou nt of lack of consideration . Sohan defended th is suit by pl eading his excl usive
own ership of the su it property on account of his having the earlier sale deed in his favour dated
1.1.1973. Chiranji lal a defendant in this suit plead s his ownership of the property as per sale
deed dated 31.1.1974 and prays for dismissa l of th e suit.
Page 2 of 8
Text of page 15
(c) Sohan files on 1.3.1980 a suit for declaration of his exclusive ownership of the
suit property (3,d suit) on the basis of the registered sale deed dated 1.1.1973 and in which suit
both Chiranji l al and Mohan are made as defendants. This suit filed by Sehan, after evidence
was led by all the parties, is decreed in favour of Sohan on 31.12.1981, holding that Sehan was
the owner of the suit property although earlier suits of Mohan and Chiranji lal were still
pending .
m
(i) Could the 3 suit of Sehan have been decided and decreed by the Court
although earlier suits of Chiranji lal and Moha n were pending? If yes, then by reference to
which provision of CPC?
(ii) If an application was filed by Chiranji lal in the 3,d suit stating that this suit of
Soh an cannot proceed till hi s!Chiranji lal's suit is decided first, such an application would have
been moved under which provisio n of CPC and how would the same have been decided?
(iii) What is the effect of the decision of the suit filed by Sohan on the pending suits
of Chiranji lal and Mohan? (Marks 2S)
Q.No.S. Facts: (a) A suit was filed by the mother Smt. Hira on behalf of her minor
son Chandresh against her father-in·law Sh. Jawahar for partition of the HUF property being the
residential house at SO, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi. Though the son was a minor no application
was filed to pursue the suit as the next friend of the minor son. Chandresh became a major
during the pendency of the suit and being in need of money sold his undivided share to one
Gurdas Singh who instead of substituting himself for Cha ndresh co ntin ued the suit on behalf of
Chandresh and obtained a decree for partition.
(b) During the execution proceedings the executing court held that instead of
partition Gurdas Singh was only entitled to the value of the undivided share and not physical
partition.
(cl When the proceedings were going on to determine the value of the share for
being paid to Gurdas Singh, the father-in-law Sh. Jawahar filed an application to hold that the
decree was null and void on two grounds. The first was that no application was filed to appoint
the mother as the next friend and therefore the decree was null and void. The second ground
was that Gurdas Singh never applied for substituting himself in place of the original plaintiff -
Chandresh and since by the time decree was passed, Chandresh was no longer owner of any
interest in the HUF property thus the decree pa ssed in favour of Chandresh was bad in law.
(i) Was it necessary for Smt. Hira to get herself appointed as a next friend by a court
order?
(ii) What would be the position if the minor was a defendant in the suit and in such
a case whether it is necessary for the court to appoint a person to defend a suit on behalf of the
minor and what would be the effect of not appointing such a person?
(iii) Whether it was necessary for Gurda s Singh to get himself substituted in pla ce of
Chandresh before the decree was passed, and if yes then the application had to be filed under
which provision of CPC, and why? (Marks 25)
Page 3 of8
Text of page 16
(SECTION - II)
(Answer any two questions. Each question is of 25 marks)
Q.No.6.(a) Amrita Singh gave a loan of Rs.5,OO,OOO/- to Kulvinder Singh bearing interest
@18%p.a. simple . A promissory note was signed by Kulvinder Singh at the time of giving of the
loan in the presence of Amrita Singh.
(bl Over two years after the loan was granted, Kulvinder Singh paid different amounts
on ten occasions and signed a register in the presence of Amrita Singh on each occasion when
he paid amounts either towards part repayment of the loan or towards interest.
(e) Amrita Singh had an accountant Kalyanji who used to maintain in the regular course
of business all the books of accounts and also all the business records of the various loans
which used to be advanced by Amrita Singh.
(d) An acknowledgment of debt form was signed by Kulvinder Singh after two years of
the signing of the promissory note in the presence of Kalyanji but not in the presence of Amrita
Singh.
(e) Since the loan was not repaid Amrita Singh filed a suit for the recovery of loan and
interest due. During the pendency of the suit and during the course of leading her evidence
Amrita Singh died. Amrita Singh in her evidence before she died had proved and exhibited the
promissory note and the regist er, but before she cou ld depose further she expired.
(f) After the legal heirs of Amrita Singh were brought on record the suit continued and
the remaining evidence in the suit was led in the form of deposition of Kalyanji and who also
again proved and exhibited the promissory note, the register which Kulvinder Singh signed at
the time of repayment of the part of the loan/interest and also the acknowledgement of debt
form.
(g) Th e Advocate of Kulvinder Singh at the stage of final arguments took the objection
that the evidence led by Amrita Singh could not be looked into as she died before she was cross
exami ned and that Kalyanji could not prove and exhibit the promissory note and the register
where Kulvinder Singh had signed because the said documents were not signed in Kalyanji's
presence by Kulvinder Singh.
Q. (i) Decide the objections.
(ii) Could Amrita Singh if she was alive and had led evidence proved and exhibited
the acknowledgment of debt form which was not signed in her presence'?
Q.No.7.(a) Two brothers, an elder and a younger, inherited an immovable property from
their father. After the death of the father a Memorandum of Family Settlement was entered
into and which showed how the property was already divided by metes and bounds by the
parties.
(b) The original of this Memorandum was retained by the elder brother as recorded in
the Memorandum and the younger brother only had a photocopy made from t he original
Memorandum.
(c) One day the elder brother went to t he house of the younger brother for discussing
the aspect of mutation of the property in the municipal records for property tax purposes in
separate names of both the brothers for the divided portions of the property, and, during the
discussion on the pretext of making a photocopy from the market out of the photocopy of the
Memorandum which was with the younger brother, the elder brother took the photocopy of
the Memorandum but did not return back from the market.
Page 4 of 8
Text of page 17
(d) Thinking that the younger brother had no longer any proof with him of the Family
Settlement, the elder brother filed a suit for partition of the inherited property claiming that
the property remained undivid ed after the death of th e fath er.
(e) It however so happened that the wife of the younger broth er had made a photocopy
of the photocopy of th e Memorandum and had put th e sa me in her bank locked and this she
remembered and got the photocopy (which had an endorsement of true copy as per original)
fro m the locker and during the course of recording of the evidence she gave it to her husband
who t hus wanted to file and prove the same.
(f) The Advocat e of the elder brother objected to the produ ction of the photocopy of
the Memorandum on the ground that th e document was only secondary evidence and hence
not admissible in evidence.
(i) Can the court admit the photocopy of the original Memo randum and what are the
requirements which a person must comply befo re he seeks to lead in evidence the
photocopy/secondary evidence such of th e Memorandum.
(ii) Wh ether any notice is required to be given to the elder broth er before leading in
evidence the photoco py of the M emorandum, and if so under which provision?
(iii) Without noti ce being given to the opposite party can evidence be led of the
ph otoco py of the Memorandum?
(iv) Is a photocopy of the Memorandu m secondary evidence, and if yes or no then
under which provisi on ?
(v) Is it permissi ble to lead in evidence a photocopy of a photocopy?
Q.No.8:(a) Raman executes a registered gift deed of his plot of land in Delhi in favour of his
younger brother Chaman out of natural love and affection and pursuant to which mutation in
the name of Chaman is done in the municipal records after taking a no-objectio n form from
Raman.
(b) In a suit for perpetu al injunction filed bV Chaman against a third person for
preventing the th ird person from entering th e suit property, Raman is added as a party to the
suit and he files a written statement admitting the execution of the gift deed of the plot in
Delhi.
(c) After this stage Chaman sells the plot for valuable consideration to Hira, and who
purch ases th e sa me after verification of the registered gift deed, the mutation papers and the
written statement filed by Raman .
(d) Hira sta rts construction on the suit plot and more or less co mpletes the
construction, without any protest from Raman who knows of the construct ion being carried
out .
(e) Hira also continues the suit filed by Chaman against the third person by getting
himself substituted as plaintiff in place of Chaman. Raman however at this stage seeks t o
amend his written statement to dispute the execution of the gift deed by filing an application to
amend his written statement to dispute the execu tion of the gift deed.
(f) Raman also files an independ ent suit, against Hira and Chaman, disputing the gift
deed on the ground that actually Raman was under a wrong belief that und er the gift deed
actually the plot of land in the village had been transferred and not t he plot in Delhi. Chaman in
the evidence in th e su it which was filed by him against the third person, which is now continued
Page 5 of8
Text of page 18
by Hira, proves the gift deed by only his own deposition that Raman had signed the gift deed in
his presence and no other witness is summoned,
Ii) Can the gift deed be said to have been validly proved by Hira in the suit which
was originally filed by Chaman and continued by Hira?
(iil Is Raman prevented from challenging the gift deed at the late stage at which he
did?
(iii) Which is the provision which Hira can take aid of to invalidate the new stand set
up by Raman by seeking amendment at the late stage?
(iv) What would be the position if Raman was not party to the suit originally filed by
Chaman but had admitted the execution of the gift deed in a letter written by him to Chaman
as also in the mutation form I.e. is there any difference in the type of admission made in a
written statement and in a letter?
Q.No.9. Answer the following giving the applicable provisions : (Marks 5 each)
A. If a fact is admitted by a person is it still required to be proved? Can a court require
an admitted fact to be proved?
8. Are books of accounts maintained in the ordinary course of business themselves
sufficient to fasten liability upon a defendant in a suit for recovery of moneys? No or yes?
C. Can a witness be cross-examined on facts not deposed by him in his examination-in-
chief, if otherwise the cross-examination is on a relevant point?
D. When a document is summoned by a plaintiff from a defendant for being produced
as evidence, can the defendant after producing the same insist that the same be taken as
evidence, if yes then when and if no then when?
E. If in a letter a person admits a fact for arriving at a compromise, can he say that such
admitted fact is without prejudice to a pending court case and the letter will not be used in any
place except for recording settlement in the court case?
Page 6 of 8
Text of page 19
(PART-B)
(SECTION -I)
Attempt any three questions
Note: Give reason in support of your decision.
Q.No. 1. '5' the sister of 'B' filed a suit for partition of properties left behind by their
father, who had expired intestate. Their mother had predeceased their father and there was
no other legal heir. The subject matter of the suit were two flats. One flat was at Dwarka and
the other one was at Model Town. The flat at Model Town was much costlier than the flat at
Dwarka. During the course of the proceedings in the suit, the parties arrived at a settlement
whereby'S' was given the flat at Dwarka, while 'B' became the exclusive owner of the flat at
Model Town. In order to compensate '5', 'B' also surrendered his rights in a small flat at Mayur
Vihar in favour of '5'. The flat at Mayur Vihar was owned by '8' and had been purchased by '8'
out of his own earnings. Decide, as to whether such a decree shall require registration under
the Registration Act ? (Marks 20)
Q.No.2. The owner of certain premises let it out to tenant for a period of five years . The
parties executed a lease deed, which w as not registered. One of the terms of the said lease
deed permitted the tenant to sub let the premises to his friend Mr.'X', if the tenant so desired,
without the prior consent of the landlord. The tenant sub let the premises to his friend Mr.'X'
without taking prior permission of the landlord, on which the landlord filed a petition for
eviction of the tenant on the ground that the tenant h,ad sub let the premises without his
consent and thus the tenant had incurred the liability of eviction under Section 14(1) proviso (b)
of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958. The tenant contends that in view of the term of the lease
as stated above, he (tenant) was well within his rights to sublet the premises. The landlord on
the other hand contends that the lease deed having not been registered cannot be looked into.
The tenant replies that the clause permitting the subletting, by itself, did not require
compulsory registration. Thus, though the lease deed cannot be looked into for determining
the period of the lease between the parties, the same can certainly be looked into for the
limited purpose of establishing the authority of the tenant to sub let the premises.
Decide. (Marks 20)
Q.No.3, 'A' and '8' entered into partnership business of retail sale of books on various
subjects. 'A' was having a shop at Chandni Chowk which was made the common property of
the firm . 'B' invested substantial amount of cash for purchasing the books from various
publishers and other purposes relating to the business . The partnership continued for some
months. There was a dispute between the two partners and thus the partnership was got
dissolved through a dissolution deed, whereby 'B' was given the exclusive rights of the shop
while 'A' received the total amount lying in the bank account of the partnership firm along with
the unsold books lying with the firm on th e date of the transfer. 'A' then filed a suit for
dissolution of partnership and accounts, wherein he contends that since the partnership assets
included immovable property, namely, the shop and the dissolution deed recorded
relinquishment by 'B' of his interests in the shop, this document was compulsorily registrable
under Section 17(1)(c) of the Registration Act. Since the dissolution deed was not got
registered it was inadmissible in evidence to prove the dissolution of the partnership,
settlement of accounts and ownership of the shop.
Decide. (Marks 20)
Q.No.4. 'A' sold a house to 'B' for a sum of Rs.l,OO,OOO/- on 3.3.2011. 'A' retained the
possession of the house . . On 7.3.2011, 'A' again sold the same house to 'C' for a sum of
Rs.2,00,OOO/-. 'C' was aware of the earlier sale deed between 'A' and 'B'. The sale deed in
favour of tc' was got registered on the same day and 'C' was also given the physical possession
Page70fS
Text of page 20
of the house. The sale deed in favour of 'B' was got registered on 10.4.2011. 'B' thereafter
filed a suit for recovery of possession of the house against 'A' and 'e' .
Decide. (Marks 20)
(SECTION -II)
Attempt any two questions
Q.No. 5. Mohan advanced Rs. 1,00,000/- by way of loan to Raman . Th e payment was
made on 1.1.2007. On the same day, Raman executed a document, whereby Raman undertook
to pay the loan amount with simple interest at the rate of 10% p.a. on demand. On 10.10.2009,
Mohan got sent a legal notice asking Raman to make the payment of due amount. In response,
Raman asked his advocate to respon d to the notice requ esting Mohan to extend the time for
making the payment for a period of two years as Raman was passing through financial crisis and
had no money to make th e payment. The advocate of Raman sent the reply to the notice
accordingly. The reply was got drafted and dispatched on 1.1.2010 under the signatures of the
advocate of Raman. Mohan filed a suit against Raman for recovery of loan amount along with
accrued interest on 3.2.2012. Raman in his written statement raised the sale contention that
the suit is barred by limitation. Decide while referring to various legal provisions involved.
(Marks 20)
Q.No. 6. 'X'. a landlady inducted 'y' as a tenant on a monthly rent of Rs.5,OOO/- per
month. The tenancy was for two years and was evidenced by the registered lease deed
executed between the parties . The tenancy commenced in the year 1992. After expiry of two
years, the tenant continued to occupy the tenanted premises . He also paid rent till the year
1996. In the year 1996, 'X' was transferred to Chennai and 'Y' stopped paying the rent
thereafter. There was no correspondence between 'x' and 'V' till the year 2011. In the year
2011, 'X' got sent a legal notice to 'V', terminating th e tenancy as per law and asked 'Y' to hand
over the vacant possession of the premises to 'X'. 'X' vide the same legal notice, also asked 'Y'
to remit the com plete due amount of rent to 'X' . 'Y' in response contends that as he continued
in possession of the prem ises for fourteen years without paying even a single rupee by way of
rent, he has become th e owner of the house. Thus he is neither liable to vacate t he tenanted
house nor liable to pay t he due rent.
Decide. (Marks 20)
Q.NO.7. Ramesh sold his land measuring 200 square yards for Rs.2,OO,OOO/- and handed
over the possession of the same to Sarjesh in the year 1990. In the year 1991, Sarjesh sold his
land to ABC Co . for a sum of Rs.2,10,OOO/-. On 2.3.1992, one of the sons of Ramesh, who had
attained majority in the year 1991, filed a suit for recovery of possession of the land against
ABC Co . on the ground that the land in issue was a Joint Hindu Family property and thus
Ramesh could not have sold the land to Sarjesh as the transaction was neither for a legal
necessity nor in the interests of the Joint Hindu Family. ABC Co. in its written statement inter
olio raised a preliminary objection that as Sarjesh has not been made party to the suit, and the
two sa le deeds were not under challenge, the suit as framed was not maintainable. The suit
rema ined pending for some time and ultimately got dismissed on the two preliminary
objections raised by ABC Co. The plaintiff fil ed an appeal and then withdrew the same in the
year 2001 with liberty to take such other legal recourse including a civil suit against the
defendant as may be permissible in law. The plaintiff then in the year 2002 again filed a fresh
su it for a declaration that the sale deed in favour of Sarjesh and the consequent sale deed in
favour of ABC Co . were null and void and for recovery of possession of land. This time Sarjesh
was made a defendant to the suit. ABC Co . filed its written statement and ra ised a prelim inary
objection that the suit was barred by time. The plaintiff relied on Section 14 of the Limitation
Act and contend ed that the su it was within time.
Decide. (Marks 20)
Page 8 of8Official key not published for this paper.
Page 1 of 20
Source: High Court of Delhi. Question paper published by High Court of Delhi.