LEGAL REASONING: Practice Questions for CLAT 2016

1. The concept of judicial review has been borrowed from the Constitution of-

(a) U.S.S.R. (b) U.K. (c) U.S.A. (d) Switzerland


2. Astha, who is a very good painter, is also a patient in a mental asylum, who, at intervals, is of sound mind. During one of these intervals, she entered into a relationship with Lopamudra to paint a picture of her for a specified amount. She, however, asked Lopamudra to pay her the entire amount in advance. One month later, on the day of delivery of the painting, Astha refused to perform the contract saying that she suffers from insanity. Can Lopamudra force performance?

Principle: A person is said to be of sound mind for the purpose of making a contract if, at the time when he makes it, he is capable of understanding it and of forming a rational judgment as to its effect upon his interests.

(a) Yes, because Astha was of sound mind when she entered into the contract.

(b) No, because Astha had been of unsound mind even while the contract was signed which is proved by the fact that she was admitted in an asylum.

(c) Yes, because a good painter can paint irrespective of his/her mental stability.

(d) No, because it was silly on Lopamudra’s part to enter into a contract with a mental patient admitted in an asylum.


3. Principle: Mere silence as to the facts likely to affect the willingness of a person to enter into a contract is not a fraud, unless the circumstances of the case are such that, on close examination it is found to be the duty of the person keeping silent to speak, or unless his silence is, in itself, equivalent to speech.

Facts: X sells by auction to Y, a horse which X knows to be of unsound state of mind. X says nothing to Y about the horse’s unsound state of mind. Give the correct answer.

(a) X can be held liable for fraud. (b) X can be held liable for misrepresentation.

(c) X cannot be held liable, because he did not say anything positive about the mental state of the horse.

(d) X cannot be held liable because it is the buyer who must be aware of the things.


4. Agni enters into a contract with Tanuj whereby Tanuj will supply Agni with 10 grams of cocaine for a specified amount. Is the contract void?

Principle: If the consideration or object of an agreement is forbidden by law, or is of such a nature that would defeat the provisions of any law, or is fraudulent, or is injurious to the person or property of another or, the Court regards it as immoral, or opposed to public policy, then the object or consideration shall be deemed unlawful. Every agreement of which the object or consideration is unlawful is void.

a. Yes, because the contract is for the sale of illegal drugs.

b. No, because Agni and Tanuj have entered into the contract out of their own free will, and being the citizens of a free country, they have the right to do so.

c. Yes, because drugs are harmful. (d) None of these.


5. If the tax rate increases with the higher level of income, it is called –

(a) Progressive Tax (b) Proportional Tax (c) Lump sum Tax (d) Regressive Tax


6. Which State provided separate reservation for Muslims and Christians in the State Backward Classes List in 2007?

(a) Andhra Pradesh (b) Tamil Nadu (c) Bihar (d) Kerala


Principle (For Question 7 and 8): Nothing which is not intended to cause death, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to cause, or be known by the doer to be likely to cause, to any person for whose benefit it is done in good faith, and who has given a consent, whether express or implied, to suffer that harm, or to take the risk of that harm.

7. A fake doctor operated on a man for internal piles by cutting them out with an kitchen ordinary knife. The man died of haemorrhage.

(a) Doctor is guilty of murder. (b) Doctor is not guilty.

(c) Doctor is guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder (d) None of these.

8. Dr Mortimer performed a kidney operation upon James for removal of kidney stones. James was already affected by HIV. Dr Mortimer had warned James of all the possible risks. James, out of his own volition, decided to undertake the risks and signed a bond certifying the same. James died of haemorrhage as a result of the operation.

(a) Doctor is guilty of murder. (b) Doctor is not guilty.

(c) Doctor is guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to murder (d) None of these.


9. When the consent of a party to a contract has been obtained by Undue Influence, Fraud or Misrepresentation, the contract is-

(a)Illegal (b) Voidable (c) Void (d) Enforceable


10. In kidnapping, the consent of a minor is-

(a) Partly material (b) Wholly material (c) Party immaterial (d) Wholly immaterial

LEGAL REASONING: Practice Questions for CLAT 2016

(For Questions 11-15)


A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person’s consent, moves that property out of his or her possession, is said to commit theft.

B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage.

C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.


Draupadi, an old lady of 85 years, used to live with her granddaughter Subhadra. Draupadi was ill and therefore bedridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it ‘became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Subhadra hired a cleaner, Vinodji, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that may be there. There was a pile of old newspapers which Draupadi had stacked in a corner of her room. Vinodji asked Subhadra if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes, Vinodji took the pile to the municipality rubbish dump. While Vinodji was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Subhadra probably wouldn’t want this old painting back, especially because it was torn in several places and the colour was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hung it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him, the painting was an old ‘masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mounting the painting, Vinodji pasted it on a plain sheet of paper so that it does not tear any more. By doing so, he made its professional ‘restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half. Vinodji’s neighbour Champi discovered that the painting belonged to Subhadra. With the motive of returning the painting to Subhadra, Champi climbed through an open window into Vinodji’s room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house.

11. Has Vinodji committed theft?

(a) Yes, Vinodji has committed theft of the newspapers and the painting.

(b) No, Vinodji has not committed theft because he had Draupadi’s consent.

(c) Yes, Vinodji has committed theft of the painting, but not of the newspapers

(d) No, Vinodji has not committed theft because he has not moved the painting out of Draupadi’s possession.

12. Is Vinodji guilty of criminal damage?

(a) No, Vinodji is not guilty of criminal damage as he did not intentionally impair the value of the painting.

(b) Yes, Vinodji is guilty of criminal damage as he intentionally stuck the paper on to the painting

(c) No, Vinodji is not guilty of criminal damage as he does not have the painting in his possession anymore.

(d) No, Vinodji is not guilty of criminal damage as he has not destroyed the painting.

13. If Vinodji had discovered the painting before leaving Subhadra’s house rather than at the rubbish dump, would he have been guilty of theft in this case?

(a) Yes, he would be guilty of theft of the newspapers and the paintings.

(b) No, he would not be guilty of theft.

(c) Yes, he would be guilty of theft of the painting. (d) None of the above.

14. Is Champi guilty of theft?

(a) No, Champi is now guilty of theft since the person she took the painting from (Vinodji) was not its lawful owner.

(b) No, Champi is not guilty of theft since she took the painting only with the motive of returning it to Subhadra.

(c) Yes, Champi is guilty of theft as she took the painting out of Vinodji’s possession without his consent.

(d) None of the above.


15. Which of the following propositions could be inferred from the facts and the rules specified

(a) Champi is guilty of criminal damage as the person she took the painting from (Vinodji) was not its lawful owner.

(b) Champi is guilty of criminal damage as she took the painting without Vinodji’s consent.

(c) Champi is not guilty of criminal damage as the painting has not been completely destroyed.

(d) None of the above.


16. Public holidays are declared under-

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (b) Civil Procedure Code

(c) Constitution of India (d) Negotiable Instruments Act


17. Principle No Person shall be prosecuted for the same offence twice.

Facts: Rajiv Chanda was driving his BMW when he drove the car on the pathway and crushed three people to death. Due to lack of evidence he is acquitted, now the prosecution finds eye witness and evidence against him. They want to prosecute him again.

(a) Rajiv Chanda cannot be prosecuted again.

(b) He can be prosecuted since there is fresh evidence against him.

(c) He cannot be prosecuted as his grandfather was the chief of Army.

(d) He can be prosecutes again as he was not punished at all.


(For Questions 18-22)


A. A minor is a person who is below the age of eighteen. However, where a guardian administers the minor’s property, the age of majority is twenty-one.

B. A minor is not permitted by law to enter into a contract. Hence, where a minor enters into a contract with a major person, the contract is not enforceable. This effectively means that neither the minor nor the other party can make any claim on the basis of the contract.

C. In a contract with a minor, if the other party hands over any money or confers any other benefit on the minor, the same shall not be recoverable from the minor unless the other party was deceived by the minor to hand over money or any other benefit. The other party will have to show that the minor misrepresented her age, he was ignorant about the age of the minor and that he handed over the benefit on the basis of such representation.

Animesh convinces Kumud, a girl aged 18 that she would sell her land to him. Kumud’s mother Parineeti is her guardian. Nonetheless Kumud, without the permission of Parineeti, sells the land to Animesh for a total sum of rupees fifty lakh, paid in full and final settlement of the price. Parineeti challenges this transaction claiming the Kumud is a minor and hence the possession of the land shall not be given to Animesh. Thus Animesh is in a difficult situation and has no idea how to recover his money from Kumud.


18. Why is Parineeti justified in challenging the sale transaction?

(a) Kumud is of unsound mind and is not in a position to make rational decisions.

(b) Though Kumud is eighteen year old, she will be treated as a minor, as Parineeti is her guardian.

(c) Though Kumud is eighteen year old, she cannot sell the land without the permission of her mother.

(d) Though Kumud is eighteen year old she should not be treated like a person who has attained the age.


19. Animesh can be allowed to recover the money only if he can show that-

(a) He was deceived by Kumud who misrepresented her age.

(b) He honestly believed that Kumud was empowered under the law to sell the land.

(c) He was an honest person who had paid the full price of the land to Kumud.

(d) Both (a) and (b).


20. In order to defend the sale, Kumud will need to show that-

(a) Kumud has attained the age of majority.

(b) Kumud is mature enough to make rational decisions regarding her own affairs.

(c) The sale transaction was beneficial to her interest and will enhance her financial status. (d) None of the above.

LEGAL REASONING: Practice Questions for CLAT 2016

21. Which of the following is correct?

(a) Animesh should be allowed to recover the money because even though there is no contract, Kumud and Parineeti should not be allowed to unjustly benefit from Animesh’s money.

(b) Animesh should be allowed the possession of the land because Parineeti can always decide to approve the transaction between Animesh and Kumud.

(c) Animesh should not be allowed to recover because he induced Kumud, a minor, to sell the land.

(d) None of the above.


22. Which of the following is correct?

(a) If Animesh is allowed to recover the money, that will defeat the law framed for protecting the minors against fraudulent persons.

(b) If Animesh is not allowed to recover that will cause him injustice as he has not paid off the entire sale price.

(c) If Animesh is allowed to recover, Parineeti will benefit from both the money and the land.

(d) None of the above.


23. Whoever induces or attempts to induce a candidate, or voter, to believe that he, or any person, who he is interested in, will become, or will be rendered, an object of divine displeasure, or spiritual censure, commits the offence of-

(a)Affray (b) Illegal Gratification (c) Bribery (d) Undue Influence


24. Sajjan Singh, advanced money to his step-son, Ghantilal while Ghantilal was a minor. Ghantilal, however, looks upon Sajjan Singh as his own father. When Ghantilal came of age, Sajjan Singh obtained, by misuse of parental influence, from Ghantilal, a bond for a greater amount than the sum due in respect of the advance. The contract clearly appears to be unconscionable. Upon whom will the burden of proof rest to prove the element of undue influence?

Principle: A contract is said to be induced by undue influence where the relations subsisting between the parties are such that one of the parties is in a position to dominate the will of the other and uses that position to obtain an unfair advantage over the other.

(a) The burden of proof will rest on Ghantilal.

(b) The burden of proof will rest on Sajjan Singh.

(c) Undue influence has not been exercised at all because, in India, we consider it our duty to obey our parents.

(d) Undue influence has been exercised because, though in India, we consider it our duty to obey our parents, we should not forget that Sajjan Singh was not Ghantilal’s father.


25. A minor’s agreement is void. This proposition was made in which of the following cases?

(a)Nihaal Chand vs. Jehan Khan (b) Sreekrishnan vs. Kurukshethra University

(c)Mohori Bibi vs. Dharmodas Ghose (d) Nanjappa vs. Muthuswamy


26. The Government imposed a cap on the number of text messages sent per day, from every sim card, to 20, with immediate effect. These restrictions are to remain in force for 15 days. This action was taken against the backdrop of the exodus of north-eastern people from major cities of the country following a tide of rumours spread by text and multimedia messages that people hailing from the north-eastern states would be attacked to avenge a recent ethnic violence in one of the north-eastern states. Companies that were completely dependent upon this mode of communication for customer outreach protested against this cap on messages saying that it was infringing upon their freedom of speech and expression. Decide if it is an infringement on the freedom of speech and expression of the citizens.

Principle: All citizens shall have the right
(i) to freedom of speech and expression;

(ii) to assemble peacefully and without arms;

(iii) to form associations or unions;

(iv) to move freely throughout the territory of India;

(v) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and

(vi) to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.

However, the exercise of these rights is subject to reasonable restrictions imposed by the State.

(a) Yes, because the trade of many companies are being affected.

(b) No, because the restrictions are reasonable and have been imposed due to internal security concerns.

(c) Yes, because the Government is imposing a ban on how much we can communicate.

(d) None of these.


27. What is the meaning of the maxim, “ex turpi causa non oritur actio”?

(a) From a dishonourable cause an action does not arise.

(b) If there is a right, there is always a remedy.

(c) Damage without legal injury is not actionable.

(d) None of these.


28. Which of these systems is followed in India?

(a) Adversarial System (b) Judicial System (c) Inquisitorial System (d) None of these


29. The violation of which of the given rights leads to an action in torts?

(a) Rights in rem. (b) Rights in personam. (c) Rights ad infinitum. (d) Rights per se.


30. Valkatamma was suffering from a health condition in her stomach which required her to go through a surgery that involved cutting her stomach open as per the advice of her doctor, Dr Chembunarayan. Though the operation was successful, after a few weeks, she started suffering from an infection which was a result of her stomach being cut open for the surgery though all the reasonable precautions to avoid any such infection had been taken by the group of surgeons who operated upon her. She visited another doctor, Dr Kuttalalingam, after the development of this infection, and he told her that even a laser surgery could have cured her stomach ailment without exposing her to the risk of infection. However, as a matter of fact, there were many doctors in the country who supported the advice given by Dr Chembunarayan to cure her health condition, and there were many others who were of the same opinion as that of Dr Kuttalalingam. Nevertheless, Valkatamma sued Dr Chembunarayan. Decide.

Principle: A person is liable for the tort of negligence if he breaches a legal duty of care he owes to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff suffered a damage resulting from this breach.

a. Dr Chembunarayan will win because he had followed an accepted and established medical procedure. Moreover, reasonable precautions had been taken during the surgery.

b. Dr Chembunarayan will win because the only operation was his responsibility and the operation was successful. What happens post the operation is not his responsibility.

c. Dr Chembunarayan will lose unless he is able to prove that the practice he chose was better than the other practice in this case.

d. Dr Chembunarayan will lose because being a doctor, he owes a greater duty of care and it was his responsibility to ensure that his patients do not have to deal with such consequences.

LEGAL REASONING: Practice Questions for CLAT 2016

31. Nitin started to drive his Tata Nano in the highway after gulping down two bottles of whiskey. Isaac was driving his Reva NXR with the headlights turned off. They collided resulting in an injury on Isaac’s head. Nitin, who was highly intoxicated, had only a narrow chance to avoid the collision, but because of the high levels of alcohol in his blood, he was unable to do so. Isaac sued Nitin for negligence. Will he succeed?

Principle: A person is liable for the tort of negligence if he breaches a legal duty of care he owes to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff suffered a damage resulting from this breach.

a. Yes, because Nitin should be taught a lesson.

b. Yes, because Nitin breached the duty of care that he owes to the other people commuting on the highway.

c. No, because Isaac provided Nitin with only a narrow window of time to avoid the collision.

d. No, because they had no business driving on the highway late into the night.


32. During the Freshers’ Party of Beliaghata Law College, Saanchi pulled Aurobind’s shots. Aurobind started crying because his shots had been snatched away and decided to sue Saanchi for battery. Will Aurobind succeed in his claim?

Principle: The intentional use of force against another person without lawful justification constitutes the tort of battery.

a. No, because Aurobind could easily have helped himself to another glass.

b. Yes, because Saanchi had used force against Aurobind without lawful justification.

c. No, because law does not take note of trifles.

d. Yes, because Saanchi had infringed upon Aurobind’s right to the shots.


33. Ranveer, a con-man by profession, was sitting in his lawn with some stolen books by William Shakespeare. Suddenly, his neighbour, Anushka, entered and tried to snatch away those books from him saying that they belong to her. As it turns out, she was right. Still, Ranveer sues Anushka for trespass to goods. Will he succeed?

Principle: Interference with someone’s possession or enjoyment of movable property constitutes the tort of trespass of goods.

a. Yes, because the books were in Ranveer’s possession, and trespass is a tort against possession and not against ownership.

b. Yes, because she shouldn’t snatch things just like that. It is bad manners.

c. No, because she was the rightful owner of the books.

d. No, because the books do not belong to Ranveer, and no matter who they belong to, Ranveer cannot sue.


34. What is the meaning of the maxim “nemo judex in sua causa”?

(a) The judge needs a cause to condemn the accused.

(b) No person can be a judge in his own cause.

(c) The judiciary is appointed for a cause, and they shall serve the cause till their last breath.

(d) None of these.


35. What is a lis pendens?

(a)A pending suit (b) A pending list of suspects

(c) A pending show-cause notice (d) None of these


36. Which of the following had the most profound influence in framing the Indian Constitution?

(a)British Constitution (b) US Constitution

(c) Irish Constitution(d) The Government of India Act, 1935


37. Principle: A principal is liable for all the acts of the agent which he does in his capacity as an agent.

Facts: A Bollywood actor turned producer Balwan Khan makes a movie ‘MAA ONE’, he takes loan from a money lender Mr. Danjay Sutt, the film releases and as expected is a flop, the producer could not return the money, Danjay Sutt does not goes through the legal channel but asks Kancha Cheena to recover the debt on his behalf. In the process of recovery Kancha Cheena damages the property and manhandles Balwan Khan. Balwan Khan files case against Danjay Sutt. The money lender says he was ignorant of the collection tactics of Kancha Cheena, Is he liable in case?

(a) No he is not liable, as the act was done without the permission of Danjay Sutt.

(b) No as Kancha Cheena was not an agent, and was a goon.

(c) Yes as Kancha Cheena was appointed to recover money by Danjay Sutt.

(d) No as Balwan Khan has defaulted by not paying back and he deserved such a treatment.


38. Prateek, who is Prakha’s younger brother, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill Sachan, who is Prakha’s boyfriend. Prakha, not knowing how to react, and seeing Sachan helpless and on the verge of being murdered, hits on Prateek’s head with an antique metal vase. Prateek dies on the spot. Can Prakha claim the right of private defence of body?

Principle 1: Every person has a right to defend his own body, and the body of any other person, against any offence affecting the human body. Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.

Principle 2: The right of private defence of the body extends to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the offence reasonably causes the apprehension that death, or grievous hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such assault. Also, if the assault is with the intention of committing rape, gratifying unnatural lust, kidnapping or abducting, or wrongfully confining a person under circumstances which may reasonably cause him to apprehend that he will be unable to have recourse to the public authorities for his release, he will have the right of private defence of the body extending to causing of death.

Principle 3: Nothing is an offence which is done by a person who, at the time of doing it, by reason of unsoundness of mind, is incapable of knowing the nature of the act.

a. No, because Prateek is guilty of no offence since he was of unsound mind.

b. Yes, because she was under the apprehension that Prateek will murder Sachan.

c. No, because Sachan was being killed, and not Prakha herself. And since this “private” defence and not “public” defence, only the victim can avail of this defence, and no one else.

d. No, because a mentally-unsound person was punished despite the fact that he had no knowledge of what he was doing. One cannot simply kill innocent people, and then claim private defence.


(For Questions 39 and 40) Principle: Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any movable property out of the possession of any person without that person’ s consent, moves that property in order to such taking, is said to commit theft. The consent mentioned in the definition may be express or implied, and may be given either by the person in possession, or by any person having for that purpose authority either express or implied.

39. Anjali, embarking on a one-month trip to Venice, entrusts her Pomeranian to Tina, the owner of a kennel, till Anjali returns from her vacations. Anjali pays Tina to take care of her Pomeranian. Tina carries the Pomeranian to a pet-shop owner, and sells it. Has Tina committed theft?

a. Yes, because Tina sold it off without the consent of Anjali.

b. No, because the Pomeranian could not be taken out of Anjali’s possession because it was not in Anjali’s possession at that time.

c. No, because the Pomeranian was in Tina’s possession, and therefore, Tina had absolute right over it. (d) None of these.

40. Avantik gives his gold chain to Nikhil, a jeweller, for repairs. Nikhil carries it to his shop. After the gold chain have been repaired, Avantik defaults on the payment. Nikhil refuses to deliver back the gold chain, retains them lawfully as a security for the debt. Avantik, who was aware that Nikhil was retaining the gold chain as a security for his debt, enters the shop openly, and takes the gold chain by force out of Nikhil’s possession, and takes it away. Has Avantik committed theft?

a. Yes, because he, with dishonest intention, takes the gold chain out of Nikhil’s possession, with the intention of depriving Nikhil of the property as a security for his debt.

b. Yes, because the gold chain are in Nikhil’s possession, therefore, Nikhil is their rightful owner.

c. No, because the gold chain belong to Avantik.

d. None of these.

LEGAL REASONING: Practice Questions for CLAT 2016

41. Principle: When one person signifies to another his willingness to do or abstain from doing anything, with a view to obtaining the assent of that person to such an act or abstinence, he is said to have made a proposal.

Fact: Ramchandra telegraphed to Shyam Sunder, writing: “Will you sell me your Rolls Royce car? Telegram the lowest cash price.” Shyam Sunder also replied by telegram: “Lowest price for car is Rs. 20 lakh.” Ramanuj immediately sent his consent through telegram stating: “I agree to buy the car for Rs. 20 lakh asked by you.” Shyam Sunder refused to sell the car.

(a) He cannot refuse to sell the car because the contract has already been made.

(b) He can refuse to sell the car because it was only invitation to offer and not the real offer.

(c) It was not a valid offer because willingness to enter into a contract was absent.

(d) None of these.


42. Principle: Any direct physical interference with goods in somebody’s possession without lawful justification is called trespass of goods.

Facts: Z purchased a car from a person who had no title to it and sent it to a garage for repair. X believing wrongly that the car was his, removed it from the garage.

(a) X cannot be held responsible for trespass of goods as he was under a wrong belief.

(b) X can be held responsible for trespass of goods.

(c) X has not committed any wrong.

(d) None of the above.


43. Jalebi Bai conducted Nitinnatyam lessons in her flat which was just above Chameli’s flat. Chameli suffered from migraine and the constant thud of people’s feet from the ceiling of her house gave her severe headaches. Chameli decided to sue Jalebi Bai for nuisance. Will she succeed?

Principle: Whoever causes unreasonable interference to the right of another over his property and space is causing nuisance.

a. Yes, because Jalebi Bai should consider Chameli’s illness. They are neighbours, after all, and should be considerate to each other.

b. Yes, because Chameli is getting disturbed, ad her health is deteriorating because of the dance lessons being conducted by Jalebi Bai.

c. No, because Jalebi Bai‘s interference is not unreasonable. It is just that Chameli is a sensitive plaintiff.

d. No, because India is a free country and Jalebi Bai can do whatever she chooses to.


44. Tanvi and Ashrita were residents of Jahnvi Devi Society. Ashrita has been into the habit of practising Nitinnatyam before sunrise each morning since the past 25 years. She plays loud dance beats in her music system each morning to help her practice. The loud noise emanating from her music system disturbs Tanvi who is woken up each morning due to the sound. After putting up with this for 25 years, Tanvi finally decides she can take it no more and decides to sue Ashrita for nuisance.

Principle: Whoever causes unreasonable interference to the right of another over his property and space is causing nuisance.

a. Ashrita is liable because her dance practice cause unreasonable interference with Tanvi’s sleep.

b. Ashrita is liable because she could easily choose some other time of the day.

c. Ashrita is not liable because she has been doing this for over 20 years, and has now acquired a prescriptive right to continue with it unchallenged.

d. Ashrita is not liable because it is her wish as to what she wants to do inside her house.


45. Principle: Only Parliament or State Legislatures have the authority to enact laws on their own. No law made by the State can take away a person’s fundamental right.

Facts: Parliament enacted a law, which according to a group of lawyers is violating the fundamental rights of traders. A group of lawyers files a writ petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the statute seeking relief to quash the statute and further direct Parliament to enact a new law.

a. No writ would lie against Parliament, as the court has no authority to direct Parliament to enact or re-enact a law.

b. The court can quash existing law if it violates fundamental rights and can direct Parliament to make a new law.

c. The court can quash the existing law if it violates fundamental rights but cannot direct Parliament to make a new law.

d. None of these.


46. Who is the Legal Advisor to the Government of a State in India?

(a)The Solicitor General (b) The State Chief Legal Officer

(c) The High Court (d)The Advocate General


47. In law, the term ‘neighbour’ means-

(a) People who stay in your locality

(b) People who live adjoining to your residence

(c) People who might be affected by your actions

(d) The word has not been given any particular definition


48. Which of the following is entrusted with a statutory duty of laying down the standards of professional conduct and etiquette for advocates in India?

(a)Supreme Court of India (b) Bar Association of India

(c) Bar Council of India (d) Delhi Bar Council


49. Which of the following is the oldest High Court in India?

(a)High Court of Madras (b) High Court of Calcutta

(c)High Court of Delhi (d) High Court of Allahabad


50. What does the legal term Caveat Emptor refer to?

(a)Let the buyer beware (b) According to value

(c) An unwelcome person (d) Beyond the powers

LEGAL REASONING: Practice Questions for CLAT 2016


1c  2a  3c  4a  5a  6d  7c  8b  9b  10d  11b  12a  13c  14c  15b  16d  17a  18b  19a  20a  21c  22a  23d  24b  25c  26b  27a  28a  29b  30a  31b  32b  33a  34b  35a  36d  37c  38b  39b  40a  41c  42b  43c  44c  45c  46d  47c  48c  49b  50a

3 Response Comments

  • darshan shahJanuary 17, 2017 at 11:16 am

    for question number 15 the answer must be a right ?

    • darshan shahJanuary 17, 2017 at 11:19 am

      i meant question number 24*

  • vinamraNovember 9, 2017 at 4:49 pm

    shouldn’t the 19th one be B?


Leave A Comment

Please enter your name. Please enter an valid email address. Please enter message.