1
Question
Assertion :The parties to the contract must be competent to contract otherwise it will be a void contract. Reason: All wagering agreements are void.
Assertion :The parties to the contract must be competent to contract otherwise it will be a void contract. Reason: All wagering agreements are void.
Open in App
Solution
The correct option is B Both Assertion and Reason are correct but Reason is not the correct explanation for Assertion
Both A and R are true but R is not the true explanation of A.
Essential of a Contract under the Indian Contract Act is that the parites
participating in the Contract must competent to enter in the contract, i.e., they must haveattained the age of majority (ii) should be of sound mind (iii) should be qualified for entering into a contract by any law to which he is subject. Low prohibits (a) minors (b) persons of unsound mind (c) persons who are otherwise disqualified like an alien enemy, insolvents, convents etc.
Wagering agreements are (Rajshree Sugars and Chemicals Limited v Asix Bank Limited) nothing but ordinary betting agreements. Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act states that, "Agreements by way of wager are void; and no suit shall be brought for recovering anything alleged to be won on any wager, or entrusted to any person to abide the result of any game or other uncertain event on which any wager is made."
Incompetent persons as mentioned in the essentials are not competent to enter into a contract while a wagering agreement is a void agreement and not a contract.
Both A and R are true but R is not the true explanation of A.
Essential of a Contract under the Indian Contract Act is that the parites
participating in the Contract must competent to enter in the contract, i.e., they must haveattained the age of majority (ii) should be of sound mind (iii) should be qualified for entering into a contract by any law to which he is subject. Low prohibits (a) minors (b) persons of unsound mind (c) persons who are otherwise disqualified like an alien enemy, insolvents, convents etc.
Wagering agreements are (Rajshree Sugars and Chemicals Limited v Asix Bank Limited) nothing but ordinary betting agreements. Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act states that, "Agreements by way of wager are void; and no suit shall be brought for recovering anything alleged to be won on any wager, or entrusted to any person to abide the result of any game or other uncertain event on which any wager is made."
Incompetent persons as mentioned in the essentials are not competent to enter into a contract while a wagering agreement is a void agreement and not a contract.
Suggest Corrections
0
Similar questions