Quasi Contract MCQ Quiz Questions And Answers
(472).jpg "Quasi Contract MCQ Quiz Questions And Answers - Quiz")
Do you know about quasi-contracts? Try out this quasi-contract MCQ, and see how well you know this contract. A quasi-contract is a fictional contract recognized by a court. The notion of a quasi-contract can be traced to Roman law and is still a concept used in some modern legal systems. Learn More about Quasi Contracts in this quiz. You can share this quiz about Quasi Contracts with your mates and others on your social media feed to spread the knowledge!
- 1.
A quasi-contract is an obligation that the law creates in the absence of any agreement.
- A.
True
- B.
False
Correct Answer
A. TrueExplanation
A quasi-contract is a legal concept that imposes obligations on parties even in the absence of a formal agreement. These obligations are based on principles of fairness and justice. The law recognizes that in certain situations, one party may have received a benefit from another party, and it would be unjust for the receiving party to keep that benefit without compensating the other party. Therefore, a quasi-contract is created to ensure that the party who received the benefit fulfills their obligation to provide compensation or restitution.Rate this question:
-
- 2.
The term quasi-contract is used in the Indian Contract Act, in
- A.
Sections 68 to 72
- B.
Section 69 only
- C.
Section 71 only
- D.
None of these.
Correct Answer
D. None of these.Explanation
The correct answer is "None of these" because the term quasi-contract is not specifically mentioned or defined in the Indian Contract Act. The Act primarily deals with the formation, performance, and enforcement of contracts between parties. Quasi-contracts, also known as implied-in-law contracts, are legal obligations created by the courts to prevent unjust enrichment or unfairness. While the Indian Contract Act does not explicitly address quasi-contracts, the concept may still be recognized and applied by the courts based on general principles of equity and fairness.Rate this question:
-
- 3.
Which of the following expression is used in the Indian Contract Act in part dealing with quasi-contracts?
- A.
Quasi-contractual obligations
- B.
Certain relations of quasi-contractual obligations.
- C.
Certain relations resemble those created by contract.
- D.
Obligations in the absence of the actual contract.
Correct Answer
C. Certain relations resemble those created by contract.Explanation
The expression "Certain relations resemble those created by contract" is used in the Indian Contract Act in the part dealing with quasi-contracts. This expression suggests that there are certain relationships that may not be actual contracts, but they resemble the obligations and responsibilities created by a contract. This implies that even in the absence of a formal contract, certain obligations and liabilities may arise based on the similarity of the relationship to a contractual one.Rate this question:
-
- 4.
About quasi-contractual obligations, which of the following statements is correct?
- A.
There is no real contract in existence.
- B.
There is no offer and acceptance.
- C.
There is no intention to make a contract.
- D.
All of these.
Correct Answer
D. All of these.Explanation
The correct answer is "All of these." In quasi-contractual obligations, there is no real contract in existence, meaning that there is no legally enforceable agreement between the parties. Additionally, there is no offer and acceptance, which are essential elements of a traditional contract. Lastly, there is no intention to make a contract, as quasi-contractual obligations arise by operation of law rather than through the parties' express agreement. Therefore, all of these statements accurately describe quasi-contractual obligations.Rate this question:
-
- 5.
Quasi-contracts are __________
- A.
Void
- B.
Valid
- C.
Voidable
- D.
Illegal
Correct Answer
B. ValidExplanation
Quasi-contracts are valid contracts that are created by the law to prevent unjust enrichment. They are not actual contracts agreed upon by both parties, but rather imposed by the court to ensure fairness. These contracts are binding and enforceable, even though they lack the typical elements of a traditional contract. Therefore, the correct answer is "Valid."Rate this question:
-
- 6.
Quasi-contracts are enforceable even if the essential elements of the contract are not there.
- A.
True, as quasi-contractual obligations have been specifically made enforceable.
- B.
False, as an agreement lacking essential elements is void and unenforceable.
Correct Answer
A. True, as quasi-contractual obligations have been specifically made enforceable.Explanation
Quasi-contracts are a type of legal obligation that are imposed by the court to prevent unjust enrichment. These obligations are created by law, rather than by the agreement of the parties involved. Unlike traditional contracts, quasi-contracts do not require all the essential elements of a contract, such as offer, acceptance, and consideration. Instead, they are based on principles of fairness and equity. Therefore, even if the essential elements of a contract are not present, quasi-contractual obligations can still be enforced by the court.Rate this question:
-
- 7.
A quasi-contract is not a contract in the strict sense of the term.
- A.
True, are there is no contract in existence.
- B.
False, as it is included in the definition of a contract under the Indian Contract Act.
Correct Answer
A. True, are there is no contract in existence.Explanation
The correct answer is true because a quasi-contract is not a contract in the strict sense of the term. A quasi-contract is a legal concept that is used to impose certain obligations on parties in the absence of a formal contract. It is based on the principle of unjust enrichment, where one party is unjustly enriched at the expense of another. Therefore, even though a quasi-contract may resemble a contract in some ways, it is not a contract in the traditional sense as it lacks the essential elements required for a valid contract to exist.Rate this question:
-
- 8.
A quasi-contract is _____________.
- A.
A contract
- B.
A legal obligation
- C.
An agreement
- D.
A contingent contract.
Correct Answer
B. A legal obligationExplanation
A quasi-contract is a legal obligation that is imposed by the court to prevent unjust enrichment. It is not an actual contract or agreement between parties, but rather a legal remedy that is used when one party has received a benefit from another party and it would be unfair for them to keep that benefit without compensating the other party. Quasi-contracts are created by the court to ensure fairness and prevent one party from taking advantage of another.Rate this question:
-
- 9.
A, a tradesman, left certain goods at B's house by mistake. In this case, B,
- A.
Is bound to return the goods under quasi-contractual obligations.
- B.
Is not bound to return the goods as there is no agreement between the two.
- C.
Can use the goods as his own and can also claim compensation from A.
- D.
Is under obligation to make a fresh contract with A for the use of these goods.
Correct Answer
A. Is bound to return the goods under quasi-contractual obligations.Explanation
B is bound to return the goods under quasi-contractual obligations because B did not have any agreement with A regarding the goods. However, B received the goods by mistake, and it would be unjust for B to keep them without compensating A. Quasi-contractual obligations arise in situations where there is no formal contract but one party has benefited at the expense of the other. In this case, B has received the goods by mistake and has been unjustly enriched, so B is obligated to return the goods to A.Rate this question:
-
- 10.
A, a tradesman, left certain goods at B's house by mistake. If B uses the goods as his own, then can A recover the price from B?
- A.
Yes, on the basis of quasi-contract.
- B.
No, as there is no agreement, and A cannot get the benefit of his own mistake.
Correct Answer
A. Yes, on the basis of quasi-contract.Explanation
In this scenario, A left the goods at B's house by mistake. Even though there was no agreement between A and B, A can still recover the price of the goods from B on the basis of quasi-contract. Quasi-contract is a legal concept that allows for the recovery of unjust enrichment. In this case, if B uses the goods as his own, he would be unjustly enriched at the expense of A. Therefore, A can recover the price of the goods from B through quasi-contract.Rate this question:
-
- 11.
The basis of 'quasi-contractual relations' is the
- A.
Existence of a valid contract between the parties.
- B.
Existence of a voidable contract between the parties
- C.
Prevention of unjust enrichment at the expense of others.
- D.
Provisions contained in Section 10 of the Contract Act.
Correct Answer
C. Prevention of unjust enrichment at the expense of others.Explanation
The correct answer is "Prevention of unjust enrichment at the expense of others." Quasi-contractual relations are based on the principle of preventing unjust enrichment, which means that one party should not benefit unfairly at the expense of another party. These relations are not based on a valid or voidable contract between the parties, but rather on the idea of fairness and preventing unjust enrichment. Section 10 of the Contract Act may contain provisions related to contracts, but it is not specifically related to quasi-contractual relations.Rate this question:
-
- 12.
Quasi-contractual relations are based upon the intention of the parties.
- A.
True, an intention is the basis of every enforceable contract.
- B.
False, as this relation is imposed upon the parties by the law.
Correct Answer
B. False, as this relation is imposed upon the parties by the law.Explanation
Quasi-contractual relations are not based on the intention of the parties involved. Unlike a regular contract, where the parties voluntarily enter into an agreement, a quasi-contractual relation is imposed by the law to prevent unjust enrichment. It is a legal fiction that allows the court to create a contractual relationship between parties even if there was no actual contract. Therefore, the correct answer is false.Rate this question:
-
- 13.
The circumstances in which the quasi-contractual relations arise are provided in the Indian Contract Act itself.
- A.
True, as Sections 68 to 72 deal with certain relations resembling those created by contract.
- B.
False, as the situations of quasi-contracts, cannot be specified. It is for the courts to allow such relations, keeping in view the circumstances of the case.
Correct Answer
A. True, as Sections 68 to 72 deal with certain relations resembling those created by contract.Explanation
The given answer is true because Sections 68 to 72 of the Indian Contract Act specifically address certain relations that resemble those created by contract. These sections provide guidelines and principles for quasi-contractual relations, indicating that the circumstances in which such relations arise are indeed provided in the Act itself.Rate this question:
-
- 14.
In which of the following circumstances do the quasi-contractual obligations arise?
- A.
Liability of a finder of goods.
- B.
Compensation for non-gratuitous acts
- C.
Recovery of payments made by interested persons.
- D.
All of the above.
Correct Answer
D. All of the above.Explanation
Quasi-contractual obligations arise in all of the given circumstances. In the case of liability of a finder of goods, the finder has a duty to take reasonable steps to locate the owner and return the goods. Compensation for non-gratuitous acts refers to situations where someone performs a service or provides goods with the expectation of being paid, even if no formal contract exists. Recovery of payments made by interested persons refers to situations where someone makes a payment on behalf of another person who is legally obligated to make the payment, and they seek reimbursement. In all of these cases, quasi-contractual obligations can arise.Rate this question:
-
- 15.
The quasi-contractual obligations arise when a person
- A.
Supplies necessaries to an incompetent person.
- B.
Makes payment of money or delivery of goods or under coercion.
- C.
Both of these.
- D.
None of these.
Correct Answer
C. Both of these.Explanation
The correct answer is "Both of these." This means that quasi-contractual obligations can arise in both situations: when a person supplies necessaries to an incompetent person and when a person makes payment of money or delivery of goods under coercion. In quasi-contractual obligations, the law imposes certain obligations on parties to prevent unjust enrichment or unfairness, even if there is no formal contract in place.Rate this question:
-
- 16.
A person supplying necessaries to an incompetent person (such as a minor or lunatic) is entitled to be reimbursed from the property of such person on the basis of
- A.
Valid contract
- B.
Quasi-contract
- C.
Voidable contract
- D.
Contingent contract
Correct Answer
B. Quasi-contractExplanation
When a person supplies necessaries to an incompetent person, such as a minor or lunatic, they are entitled to be reimbursed from the property of that person on the basis of a quasi-contract. A quasi-contract is a legal concept that allows for the creation of a contractual obligation in the absence of an actual contract. It is based on the principle of fairness and prevents the incompetent person from unjustly benefiting from the goods or services provided. Therefore, the person supplying the necessaries can seek reimbursement through a quasi-contract.Rate this question:
-
- 17.
A person supplying 'necessaries' to an incompetent person is entitled to be reimbursed from the
- A.
Incompetent person personally
- B.
Parents of an incompetent person
- C.
Property of an incompetent person
- D.
Funds with the state government
Correct Answer
C. Property of an incompetent personExplanation
When a person supplies "necessaries" (essential goods or services) to an incompetent person, they are entitled to be reimbursed from the property of the incompetent person. This means that the person who supplied the necessaries can seek reimbursement by claiming a portion of the incompetent person's assets or belongings. This is because the incompetent person is unable to make sound decisions or manage their own affairs, so their property can be used to cover the expenses incurred by the supplier of necessaries.Rate this question:
-
- 18.
A supplies to B, a lunatic, the 'necessaries' suitable to his condition in life. In this case
- A.
B is personally liable to pay
- B.
B's property is liable.
- C.
B's parents are personally liable.
- D.
If B's property is not sufficient to reimburse, then he is personally liable.
Correct Answer
B. B's property is liable.Explanation
In this case, B is a lunatic and A is supplying him with the necessary items for his condition. According to the answer, B's property is liable. This means that if B's property is not sufficient to reimburse A for the supplies provided, B will be personally liable for the payment. This suggests that B's property is considered the primary source of reimbursement, but if it is not enough, B will be responsible for paying the remaining amount out of his own pocket.Rate this question:
-
- 19.
A person who supplies 'necessaries' to a minor is entitled to be reimbursed from the property of the minor on the basis of
- A.
Valid contract
- B.
Voidable contract
- C.
Quasi-contract
- D.
Contingent contract.
Correct Answer
C. Quasi-contractExplanation
A person who supplies 'necessaries' to a minor is entitled to be reimbursed from the property of the minor on the basis of a quasi-contract. A quasi-contract is a legal concept that allows for the imposition of certain obligations on parties, even in the absence of a formal contract. In this case, the person supplying the 'necessaries' to the minor can seek reimbursement based on the principle of unjust enrichment, as it would be unfair for the minor to benefit from the goods or services without compensating the supplier.Rate this question:
-
- 20.
A person making payment on behalf of another person can recover the same from such another person even if there is no contract of reimbursement.
- A.
True, as Section 69 allows the reimbursement in such circumstances.
- B.
False, as reimbursement in no case, is possible without a valid contract.
Correct Answer
A. True, as Section 69 allows the reimbursement in such circumstances.Explanation
The given statement is true because Section 69 allows for reimbursement in cases where a person makes a payment on behalf of another person, even if there is no contract of reimbursement. This means that the person who made the payment can recover the amount from the other person, regardless of the absence of a formal agreement.Rate this question:
-
- 21.
In the absence of a contract of reimbursement, which of the following conditions should be satisfied to enable a person to recover the payment made on behalf of another person?
- A.
Person making the payment must be interested in paying the amount.
- B.
Person making the payment must not be legally bound to make the payment.
- C.
Another person must be legally bound to make the payment.
- D.
All of the above.
Correct Answer
D. All of the above.Explanation
In order for a person to recover the payment made on behalf of another person in the absence of a contract of reimbursement, all of the following conditions must be satisfied: the person making the payment must be interested in paying the amount, the person making the payment must not be legally bound to make the payment, and another person must be legally bound to make the payment.Rate this question:
-
- 22.
A's property was wrongfully advertised for sale for recovery of government revenue due from B. In order to save his property, A paid the government dues. In this case, A is entitled to recover the number of dues paid by him B on the basis of:
- A.
Government contract
- B.
Valid contract
- C.
Quasi-contract
- D.
None of these.
Correct Answer
C. Quasi-contractExplanation
In this scenario, A paid the government dues to save his property, even though he was not legally obligated to do so. A quasi-contract is a legal concept that allows for the recovery of benefits conferred on another party under certain circumstances, even in the absence of a formal contract. Since A paid the government dues to protect his property, he can seek to recover the amount paid from B based on the principles of quasi-contract.Rate this question:
-
- 23.
A, a tradesman, left certain goods at B's house by mistake, who treats the goods as his own. In this case,
- A.
B is not bound to pay for the goods as there is no binding contract.
- B.
B is bound to pay as A's act is non-gratuitous and quasi-contract arises between them under Section 70.
- C.
A is not entitled to recover as no such relation arises under Section 70 due to one's own mistake.
- D.
The contract is voidable at the option of either party.
Correct Answer
B. B is bound to pay as A's act is non-gratuitous and quasi-contract arises between them under Section 70.Explanation
In this case, B is bound to pay for the goods because A's act of leaving the goods at B's house was non-gratuitous, meaning it was not a gift or done out of kindness. As a result, a quasi-contract arises between A and B under Section 70, which implies that B is obligated to compensate A for the goods. This is based on the principle of unjust enrichment, where B would be unjustly enriched if he were allowed to keep the goods without paying for them.Rate this question:
-
- 24.
Where a person finds certain goods belonging to some other person, the finder
- A.
Becomes the owner of the goods and can use them.
- B.
Is under a duty to trace the true owner and return the goods.
- C.
Can sell the perishable goods if the true owner cannot be found.
- D.
Both (b) and (c).
Correct Answer
D. Both (b) and (c).Explanation
The correct answer is both (b) and (c). When a person finds certain goods belonging to someone else, they are under a duty to trace the true owner and return the goods. However, if the true owner cannot be found or the goods are perishable, the finder is allowed to sell the goods. This means that the finder has both the responsibility to try and return the goods and the option to sell them under certain circumstances.Rate this question:
-
- 25.
Under the law, the responsibility of a finder of goods is the same as that of a
- A.
Bailee
- B.
Bailor
- C.
Thief
- D.
None of these.
Correct Answer
A. BaileeExplanation
Under the law, a finder of goods is considered a bailee. A bailee is a person who temporarily possesses someone else's property and has a duty to take reasonable care of it. This means that the finder of goods has the responsibility to safeguard the goods, prevent any damage or loss, and return them to the rightful owner. The finder does not become the owner of the goods, but rather holds them in trust until they are returned to the owner. Therefore, the responsibility of a finder of goods is the same as that of a bailee.Rate this question:
-
- 26.
A person to whom money has been paid or anything delivered by mistake or under coercion must repay or return it
- A.
True, as quasi -contractual obligations arise in such cases under Section 72.
- B.
False, as the contract affected by mistake or coercion, is not enforceable.
Correct Answer
A. True, as quasi -contractual obligations arise in such cases under Section 72.Explanation
The given statement is true because when money has been paid or anything delivered by mistake or under coercion, the person who received it is obligated to repay or return it. This obligation arises under Section 72, which deals with quasi-contractual obligations. Quasi-contracts are legal obligations that are imposed by the law in the absence of an actual contract, in order to prevent unjust enrichment. Therefore, the correct answer is true.Rate this question:
-
- 27.
A paid some money to B by mistake, which was, in fact, due to C. In this case,
- A.
A is not entitled to recover money as there is no contract between A and B.
- B.
A is not entitled to recover money as a mistake a makes the agreements. If any, void.
- C.
A is entitled to recover money under Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act.
- D.
B is not liable to repay as he did not ask for such payment.
Correct Answer
C. A is entitled to recover money under Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act.Explanation
In this case, A mistakenly paid money to B that was actually due to C. Despite there being no contract between A and B, A is still entitled to recover the money under Section 72 of the Indian Contract Act. This section states that a person who has received money by mistake or under coercion is bound to repay or return it. Therefore, even though there was no agreement between A and B, A can still recover the money from B.Rate this question:
-
- 28.
If the obligation created by the quasi-contract has not been discharged, then the injured party becomes entitled to receive compensation from a party in default.
- A.
True, as Section 73 makes a provision in this regard.
- B.
False, as Section 73 simply makes a quasi-contract enforceable without consideration.
Correct Answer
A. True, as Section 73 makes a provision in this regard.Explanation
The correct answer is true because Section 73 of the law provides that if the obligation created by a quasi-contract has not been discharged, the injured party has the right to receive compensation from the party in default. This means that if one party fails to fulfill their obligations under a quasi-contract, the other party is entitled to compensation for any damages or losses suffered as a result.Rate this question:
-
- 29.
A quasi contract is a _____________ contract.
- A.
Void
- B.
Voidable
- C.
Valid
- D.
Illegal.
Correct Answer
C. ValidExplanation
A quasi contract is a valid contract. A quasi contract is created by the law to prevent unjust enrichment. It is not a true contract because it is not formed through a mutual agreement between parties, but it is treated as a contract to ensure fairness and prevent one party from benefiting at the expense of another. Even though there is no actual contract in place, the law imposes certain obligations and remedies as if there was a valid contract. Therefore, the correct answer is "Valid".Rate this question:
-
- 30.
A person supplying __________ to incompetent persons is entitled to be reimbursed on the basis of quasi-contracts.
- A.
Necessaries
- B.
Luxuries
- C.
Any material
- D.
Ornaments only
Correct Answer
A. NecessariesExplanation
A person supplying necessaries to incompetent persons is entitled to be reimbursed on the basis of quasi-contracts. This means that if someone provides essential items or services to someone who is unable to care for themselves or make decisions, they can seek reimbursement for those necessaries. This is because it is considered unfair for the supplier to bear the burden of providing for someone who is unable to do so themselves.Rate this question:
-
Back to top