AU LLM MCQs Based on TPA Cases by Legal Chariot Part1
Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)
-
In which case did the Supreme Court invalidate transfers via General Power of Attorney (GPA) sales?
A. Rajender Singh v. Santa Singh
B. Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana
C. Ram Lal v. Phagua
D. Mohan Lal v. Jai Bhagwan -
The doctrine of Lis Pendens was reinforced under Section 52 of the TPA in which case?
A. Bhim Singh v. Kan Singh
B. Kartar Singh v. Harbans Kaur
C. Fateh Chand v. Balkishan Dass
D. Gita Devi v. Munder Devi -
Which case clarified the essentials of a valid sale under Section 54 of the TPA?
A. Nand Kishore Mehra v. Sushila Mehra
B. M.P. Housing Board v. Progressive Writers
C. Raja Bajrang Bahadur Singh v. Thakurain Bakhtraj Kuer
D. Pomal Kanji Govindji v. Vrajlal -
The significance of exclusive possession in lease versus license was clarified in:
A. Associated Hotels of India Ltd. v. R.N. Kapoor
B. Ram Baran Prasad v. Ram Mohit Hazra
C. Shantabai v. State of Bombay
D. Narandas Karsandas v. S.A. Kamtam -
Which case ruled that adverse possession must be open, continuous, and hostile?
A. Pomal Kanji Govindji v. Vrajlal
B. Rajender Singh v. Santa Singh
C. R.K. Mohammed Ubaidullah v. Hajee Wahab
D. Mohan Lal v. Jai Bhagwan -
Section 53A was expanded in protection even without possession in:
A. M.P. Housing Board v. Progressive Writers
B. Fateh Chand v. Balkishan Dass
C. Suraj Lamp & Industries v. Haryana
D. Ram Lal v. Phagua -
A gift deed must be registered to be valid was ruled in:
A. K. Balakrishnan v. K. Kamalam
B. Gita Devi v. Munder Devi
C. Nand Kishore Mehra v. Sushila Mehra
D. Kartar Singh v. Harbans Kaur -
The case that emphasized invocability of part performance only with possession:
A. Fateh Chand v. Balkishan Dass
B. Vasanibhai Nayak v. Somnath Nayak
C. M/S Sethi Auto v. DDA
D. Gita Devi v. Munder Devi -
Which case clarified the doctrine of Lis Pendens for immovable property only?
A. Narandas Karsandas v. S.A. Kamtam
B. Bhim Singh v. Kan Singh
C. Raja Bajrang Bahadur Singh v. Kuer
D. Suraj Lamp v. Haryana -
What was the significance in Mohan Lal v. Jai Bhagwan (1988)?
A. Defined lease vs license
B. Clarified mortgagee’s power to sell
C. Reinforced gift registration
D. Protected adverse possession
-
In which case was it held that permissive possession does not become adverse possession?
-
Which case clarified that a lease must involve exclusive possession?
-
The rule in Ram Baran Prasad v. Ram Mohit Hazra applies to which mortgage type?
-
Who emphasized the irrevocability of gifts once completed?
-
What was held in Gita Devi v. Munder Devi about acceptance?
-
The rule that part performance cannot override registration was stated in:
-
Who clarified sale deed must be executed by owner or authorized agent?
-
License does not create interest in property — which case?
-
Which case dealt with rights of lessee in perpetual lease?
-
The case limiting scope of Section 53A to a defensive shield is:
-
Who held that adverse possession doesn’t apply against co-owners?
-
Which case protected government land from being acquired via adverse possession?
-
The case defining easements and prescriptive rights is:
-
In which case did the court apply Lis Pendens to protect litigants?
-
Which case involved transfer of property by minor through guardian?
-
Which case addressed unauthorized GPA sales?
-
Who ruled that unregistered documents don’t confer title but show possession?
-
In which case did part performance protection get extended?
-
Which case emphasized perpetual lease protections?
-
In what case was the requirement of registered sale deed highlighted for immovable property?
-
Which case clarified gift deed must be accepted to be complete?
-
Which case involved revocation of a completed gift?
-
Who ruled that mortgagee can sell property without court order?
-
In which case did the SC distinguish lease vs license in 1958?
-
Which case set precedent for hostile possession?
-
Who held that GPA sales require proper registration?
-
Who ruled that statutory registration requirements override equity?
-
Case where the lease/license distinction based on possession was emphasized?
-
Who clarified co-ownership protects against adverse possession?
-
What case prevented fraudulent transfers during litigation?
-
Who dealt with minor’s property rights under gift deed?
-
Which judgment focused on doctrine of part performance and possession?
-
Who held that license does not amount to lease?
-
Which case dealt with usufructuary mortgage rights?
-
Who ruled that GPA cannot transfer ownership without sale deed?
-
Part performance cannot be invoked if transferee lacks possession — which case?
-
Who held that joint ownership blocks adverse possession?
-
Which ruling addressed statutory override of equitable doctrines?
-
Who ruled that gift deed must be registered under Section 123?
-
What case emphasized acceptance under Section 122 of TPA?
Answers
- B
- A
- C
- A
- B
- A
- C
- B
- A
- B
- R.K. Mohammed Ubaidullah v. Hajee C. Abdul Wahab
- Associated Hotels of India Ltd. v. R.N. Kapoor
- Ram Baran Prasad v. Ram Mohit Hazra
- Kartar Singh v. Harbans Kaur
- Gita Devi v. Munder Devi
- Sant Lal Jain v. Avtar Singh
- R.K. Mohammed Ubaidullah v. Hajee C. Abdul Wahab
- M/S Sethi Auto v. DDA
- Jagan Nath v. Jagdish Rai
- Fateh Chand v. Balkishan Dass
- Pomal Kanji Govindji v. Vrajlal Karsandas
- State of Rajasthan v. Padmavati Devi
- Puran Singh v. State of Punjab
- Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper Construction Co.
- K. Balakrishnan v. K. Kamalam
- Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana
- Biswanath Agarwalla v. Sabitri Bera
- M.P. Housing Board v. Progressive Writers
- Jagan Nath v. Jagdish Rai
- Raja Bajrang Bahadur Singh v. Thakurain Bakhtraj Kuer
- Gita Devi v. Munder Devi
- Kartar Singh v. Harbans Kaur
- Mohan Lal v. Jai Bhagwan
- Shantabai v. State of Bombay
- Rajender Singh v. Santa Singh
- Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana
- Sant Lal Jain v. Avtar Singh
- Associated Hotels of India Ltd. v. R.N. Kapoor
- Pomal Kanji Govindji v. Vrajlal
- Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper Construction Co.
- K. Balakrishnan v. K. Kamalam
- Vasanibhai Nayak v. Somnath Nayak
- M/S Sethi Auto v. DDA
- Ram Baran Prasad v. Ram Mohit Hazra
- Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Haryana
- Vasanibhai Nayak v. Somnath Nayak
- Pomal Kanji Govindji v. Vrajlal
- Sant Lal Jain v. Avtar Singh
- Nand Kishore Mehra v. Sushila Mehra
- Gita Devi v. Munder Devi
Post a Comment