PLUS
Legal Aptitude
Introduction to Legal Knowledge
Number of Questions : 10
1. Principle: The doctrine of Precedent states
that the judgment of a higher appellate
authority is binding on the lower courts. The
judgment of one High Court will be binding
only on the lower courts within its jurisdiction.
The judgments of other High Courts will have
persuasive value on the lower courts.
Facts: Wali Dar filed an appeal in the Jammu
and Kashmir High Court against the order of
the Srinagar District Court, situated at
Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir. The main
contention of the appellant was that the
Srinagar District Court inadvertently
overlooked the judgment of the Punjab and
Haryana High Court on the issue, therefore
the order of the District Court is bad in law as
it deviated from the doctrine of precedence.
The appellant further stated that the High Court
must follow the doctrine of precedence and
allow the appeal. The High Court declined to
give relief to the appellant and the appellant
moved to the Supreme Court with the same
prayer. Decide whether the doctrine of
precedence has been violated?
(a) Both the District Court and the High Court
of Jammu and Kashmir have violated the
doctrine of precedence.
(b) Only the District Court has violated the
doctrine of precedence.
(c) Only the High court of Jammu and
Kashmir has violated the doctrine of
precedence.
(d) Neither the District Court nor the High
court of Jammu and Kashmir has violated
the doctrine of precedence.
Legal Aptitude – 2
02
CEX–9236/21-B
2. Principle: No court shall proceed with the
trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is
directly and substantially in issue in a
previously instituted suit between the same
parties or their representatives.
Facts: A and B are the only heirs of C, their
father. They are locked in litigation over the
issue of ownership of the house left intestate
by their deceased father. A filed a suit before
the civil judge, Delhi seeking a declaration
that the ownership lies with him. While the
matter was still pending, B instituted a fresh
suit before the same court seeking declaration
from the court that the ownership lies with
him. Decide upon the validity of institution of
the suit by B?
(a) B can institute a fresh suit over the same
matter between the same parties even
though the matter is in issue in a
previously instituted suit.
(b) B cannot institute a fresh suit over the
same matter as the matter is in issue in
a previously instituted suit.
(c) B can institute a fresh suit as the matter
in issue is different. In the previous suit A
is seeking a declaration to have himself
declared as the owner and in the latter
suit B is seeking a declaration to have
himself declared as owner.
(d) B cannot institute a fresh suit as the same
parties are involved in litigation over the
same issue in a previously instituted suit.
Page 1
3. Principle: In India, a system of hierarchy of
laws is followed and the laws/rules ranked
lower in hierarchy must be in consonance with
the higher ranked laws.
Facts: The Constitution of India vests the
power to make laws in the legislature, the
function of executing the laws to the executive
and the function of interpretation of laws in
the judiciary. The legislature basically outlines
the broad contours of the law and the function
of laying down the details i.e. the rules, within
those contours are delegated to the executive
by the legislature under the rule making power.
Thus:
(a) In the Indian legal system, the
Constitution sits at the top of hierarchy of
laws followed by the rules formed by the
executive and then comes the laws made
by the legislature.
(b) In the Indian legal system, the rules made
by the legislature are ranked at top of the
hierarchy followed by the law made by
the legislature and then the Constitution.
(c) In the Indian legal system, the
Constitution sits at the top of hierarchy of
laws followed by the laws made by the
Parliament and then the rules made by
the executive.
(d) In the Indian legal system; the
Constitution, the laws made by parliament
and the rules formed by the executive have
the same status.
4. Principle: Every court has its local or
territorial jurisdiction beyond which it cannot
exercise its jurisdiction.
Facts: A filed a suit for execution against B in
the District court of Patiala. The court passed
an order attaching properties of B in Patiala,
Ambala and Chandigarh in order to execute
the decree. B challenged the attachment of
properties on the basis of lack of territorial
jurisdiction. Decide.
Page 2
(a) The district court of Patiala does not
possess the territorial jurisdiction to attach
the properties.
(b) The district court of Patiala does possess
the territorial jurisdiction to attach property
in Patiala.
(c) The district court of Patiala does possess
the territorial jurisdiction to attach the
properties.
(d) The district court of Patiala does not
possess the territorial jurisdiction to attach
property in Chandigarh as it a Union
Territory.
5. Principle: A suit shall be filed in the court of
lowest grade competent to try it. It is generally
the plaintiff's valuation in the plaint that
determines the jurisdiction.
Facts: A suit for accounts was filed amounting
to Rs. 990. It was filed by X against Y in the
Court of Small Causes having pecuniary
jurisdiction of maximum Rs. 1000. After
determination of the claims, the court finds
that on taking the accounts the amount due
is Rs. 1600. Decide whether the court is
deprived of its jurisdiction to pass a decree
for that amount?
(a) Since the amount due is higher than the
pecuniary jurisdiction of the court, the
court is deprived of its jurisdiction from
passing a decree.
(b) The court is not deprived of its jurisdiction
from passing a decree because the matter
falls under the pecuniary jurisdiction of the
court.
(c) The court can pass a decree but it must
be confirmed, on filing an application, by
the court which has appellate powers over
the court passing the decree.
(d) The court can pass a decree but it must
first seek directions from the court,
wherein an appeal lies against the decree.
Legal Aptitude – 2
6. Principle: A court cannot adjudicate upon a
subject-matter, which does not fall within its
province. A jurisdiction regarding subject
matter is essential.
Facts: The Parliament passed a law
establishing the Real Estate Tribunal,
conferring exclusive jurisdiction for trial of suits
relating to disputes between private real estate
developers and purchasers. A, purchased a
flat from Moja Developers. The possession of
the flat was to be given in October, 2014 but
the company missed the deadline. A filed a
suit in the city civil court. The city civil court
passed a decree in favour of A. Decide upon
the issue of the city civil court adjudicating
the matter and validity of the decree?
(a) The city civil court had concurrent
jurisdiction along with the tribunal over the
matter as the law never stated that the
jurisdiction of other competent courts is
ousted, therefore the court had jurisdiction
and the decree is valid.
(b) The city civil court had no jurisdiction to
adjudicate the matter and the decree
rendered is a nullity.
(c) The city civil court had no jurisdiction,
however once it is seized with the matter;
the decree passed is a valid one.
(d) The city civil court had concurrent
jurisdiction with the real estate tribunal
but the decree to be valid must be
confirmed by the real estate tribunal.
7. Principle 1: The law of limitation bars only
the remedy but does not extinguish the right.
A contract to pay time-barred debt is valid.
Principle 2: Generally the period of limitation
is three years from the date on which the
cause of action arose.
Facts: A owes certain mony to B under a
contract. The money having become due; B
does not ask A for the money. Four years
Legal Aptitude – 2
later, B files a suit against A, demanding the
payment of money. A makes a contract with
B to pay the amount if B withdraws the suit.
Decide if A can avoid the payment of money
made under a contract to B and whether the
transaction is hit by the law of limitation?
(a) Yes, as a period of more than three years
has passed from the date on which the
cause of action arose, therefore the
transaction is hit by limitation.
(b) No, even though the suit may be hit by
limitation but the contract is completely
valid making A, liable to pay.
(c) Yes, as a period of more than three years
has passed, no suit can be filed since
the transaction is hit by limitation.
(d) No, as limitation does not apply to civil
litigation.
8. Principle: The principle of natural justice
requires that no man must be condemned
unheard. In other words every person must
be given a fair opportunity of being heard
before decision regarding him/her is made.
Explanation: In case a party is given a
chance to present its case and such a party
fails to appear then the court can file an ex-
parte order.
Facts: A filed a suit against B in the district
court for partition of the ancestral property.
The court issued summons to B to appear
before the court on a certain date. On the
appointed date B did not appear before the
court. The court again summons to B to
appear before the court and B ignored again.
The court issued summons for the third time
to B but he failed to appear. Consequently
the court issued an ex-parte (without the
presence of one party) order against him. The
order of the court was appealed in High Court
on the ground that principles of natural justice
have been violated. Decide.
Page 3
 (a) The ex-parte order does not violate the
principle of natural justice.
(b) Passing an ex-parte order violates the
principles of natural justice as the other
party is not heard.
(c) Only High Courts have the authority to
pass an ex-parte order.
(d) A party need not always be heard before
passing an order.
9. Principle 1: Contempt of court refers to a
deliberate act intended to lessen the authority
or dignity of a court, embarrass, hinder, or
obstruct the administration justice, or disobey
10.
a court's lawful order.
Principle 2: The order of lower court against
which an appeal is preferred merges in the
order of the appellate court.
Facts: A filed a suit against B seeking
payment of money due under a contract, in
the District Court of Delhi. The suit was
decided against B, as the court allowed the
relief sought by A. B, filed an appeal against
the order in the High Court. The High Court
refused to disturb the findings of the lower
court. B preferred an appeal against the order
of the High Court in the Supreme Court and
the Supreme Court dismissed B's appeal. B
was unhappy about the order and when A
sought the implementation of the order, B
refused to comply with the same. Decide
whether B has committed contempt of court
and if yes, against which court?
(a) B has not committed contempt of court
as he was unhappy about the decision of
the court; therefore he has a valid
justification to refuse implementation.
(b) B has committed contempt of court, as
he willfully disobeyed the order of a court
and the contempt is in reference to the
order of district court, which has passed
© LST 2020 Replication or other unauthorised use of this material is prohibited by the copyright laws of India
Page 4
the decree in the first place. The higher
courts merely confirmed the finding of the
district court.
(c) B has committed contempt of court, as
he willfully disobeyed the order of a court
and the contempt was committed in
relation to the order of the High Court where
the first appeal was preferred.
(d) B has committed contempt of court, as
he willfully disobeyed the order of a court
and the contempt was committed in
relation to the order of the Supreme Court.
Principle 1: Mediation seeks to rebuild and
repair a relationship through an impartial and
independent intermediary. Mediation is
informal and not usually legally binding.
Principle 2: Arbitration is an out of court
procedure which also involves an impartial
third party, who is asked to make a decision.
The parties present evidence to the arbitrator,
who makes a decision that they have agreed
in advance to abide by.
Facts: A dispute arises between A and B. They
come to a mutual agreement that they want
to avoid lengthy court litigation and under the
same agreement decide to refer the issue to
C, an impartial third party. The third party
makes a determination. The act of the third
party is within the scope of the agreement
between the parties. On the basis of the facts
given above, decide:
(a) The parties were involved in Mediation.
(b) The parties were involved in Arbitration.
(c) The act of A and B was illegal as they
oust the jurisdiction of courts to settle
disputes.
(d) The parties were neither involved in
Arbitration nor Mediation.
Legal Aptitude – 2
 CEX–9236/21-B Legal Aptitude – 2
Answers and Explanations
1 d 2 a 3 c 4 a 5 b
1. d The doctrine of precedence states that the judgment
of the higher appellate authority is binding on the lower
courts. In this case, as regards the District Court of
Srinagar, the higher appellate authority is Jammu and
Kashmir High Court and since the order in question
was passed by a different High Court other than the
one which has appellate authority, the same is not
binding though it has persuasive value. As regards
the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, since both the
High Courts are at the same level, the judgments of
other high courts have persuasive value again. Thus
the doctrine of precedence was not violated by either
of the courts.
2. a The principle states that a court cannot proceed with
the trial of any suit in which the matter in issue is
directly and substantially in issue in a previously
instituted suit between the same parties or their
representatives. Thus, the bar is only on the court to
proceed with the trial, there is no bar on the parties to
institute a new suit on the basis of the same issue.
Therefore the institution of the suit is valid, but the
court cannot go ahead with the trial.
3. c The principle states that the Indian legal system follows
hierarchy of laws. The facts clearly state that the
Constitution vests the power to make laws in the
legislature and legislature delegates the power to make
rules to the executive. Therefore all power to make
laws stem from the Constitution, therefore the
Constitution is the supreme law. The power to make
rules is derived from the law making power of the
legislature, in other words the legislature outlines the
broad contours of the law and the executive makes
rules within those contours. Thus the rules are subject
to the laws made by the legislature. Therefore in the
hierarchy of laws, the Constitution takes precedence
followed by the laws made by the legislature and then
comes the rules made by the executive.
4. a The principle clearly states that each court has its
local and territorial jurisdiction beyond which it cannot
exercise jurisdiction. In this case, the territorial
jurisdiction of the district court of Patiala extends over
Patiala, hence it has the power to attach properties in
Patiala only and nowhere else.
5. b The principle clearly states that the pecuniary
jurisdiction is determined by the valuation presented
by the plaintiff in the plaint. In this case, though the
amount due as determined by the court is higher than
its pecuniary jurisdiction, but the valuation presented
by the plaintiff is within the pecuniary jurisdiction,
therefore the court is competent to pass a decree.
Legal Aptitude – 2
PLUS
6 b 7 b 8 a 9 d 10 b
6. b The principle clearly states that a court cannot
adjudicate upon a subject matter, which does not fall
within its province. Further it holds subject matter
jurisdiction essential to adjudicate a dispute. In this
case, the Parliament confers upon the tribunals,
exclusive jurisdiction to deal with cases relating to
real estate disputes. The use of the word exclusive
indicates that the jurisdiction of all other courts has
been ousted. Therefore the city civil court had no
jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the matter. The principle
further states that such jurisdiction is essential, thereby
indicating that lack of such jurisdiction would render
the decree a nullity. Therefore the city civil court had
no jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter and the decree
rendered is a nullity.
7. b Regardless of the fact that the suit is hit by limitation
by virtue of Principle 2 yet a contract to pay time barred
debt is completely valid by virtue of Principle 3.
8. a The principle of natural justice states that a party must
be given fair opportunity of hearing. The principle of
natural justice requires opportunity must be given, it is
not necessary that the party must be heard in any
case before passing an order. A party who forgoes
his opportunity cannot claim that his right of natural
justice has been violated. In the instant case, B was
issued summons thrice before issuing an ex-parte
order against him. Since he did not appear before the
court, he cannot claim that the ex-parte order violates
his right of natural justice.
9. d In this case B has committed contempt of court as he
willfully disobeyed the order of the court by not
implementing the order. The second principle states
that if an appeal is preferred against an order of the
court, the order of the lower court merges in the order
of the appellate court. In the instant case, an appeal
was preferred against the order of the lower court
right up to Supreme Court, which is the highest
appellate authority. Once the Supreme Court passes
an order, the orders of the lower court are merged
with the order of the Supreme Court. Therefore in this
case B has committed contempt of the order of the
Supreme Court.
10. b In the instant case, the impartial third party makes a
determination i.e. it comes to a decision and the facts
suggest that the act of the third party was within the
scope of the agreement. Therefore the third party
was acting as an Arbitrator in the Arbitration.
Page 1