Question 3 – Option a) is the correct answer. Explanation – The passage states that the right to freedom of expression, which is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution, is subject to reasonable restrictions, so option (a) is correct. The consideration is described as a consideration. It is also crucial for the validity of the Treaty. A promise to do something or give something without consideration is legally unenforceable and therefore invalid. The consideration does not need to be in kind or cash. A contract without consideration is a betting contract or bet. In addition, the consideration must also be lawful. It is not necessary for these principles to apply only to natural persons, but also to capital companies which are considered to be legal persons.
1. In the context of the given passage, the term “use of the law” means question 1 – option (c) is the correct answer. Explanation – Using the word “sanitize” in the context of the given passage means amending the defamation law to remedy its shortcomings, so option (c) is correct. The correct answer is (c) – the state should not control drug prices, as the market would determine the best price for these drugs. The author gives the reason for drug price controls at the beginning of the second paragraph – since, unlike developed countries, medical costs in India are borne by citizens, the state intervenes by controlling the prices of certain drugs. So, based on this reasoning, there would be no reason for the state to control prices if citizens did not have to pay for medicines. There is nothing in the passage that supports either (a), (b) or (d) as the right option. In the aptitude department of CLAT, about 35 to 29 questions are asked. Try to answer these questions to test your legal reasoning skills and level of readiness. Research capacity, problem-solving ability, hypothetical issues, tort law, Indian Treaty Act, Indian Constitution, important court decisions.
Read more: Static legal knowledge issues for CLAT Reason: The correct answer is (d) – the low price would limit the availability of the drug on the market, as pharmaceutical companies might not want to manufacture or import the drug and sell it at that price. This option is supported by the first paragraph, which describes how pharmaceutical companies have pointed out that rising import costs have made the production of some drugs uneconomic, as the ingredients are usually imported. The author does not discuss the pricing policy of drug ingredient manufacturers and, therefore, option (b) may not be correct. There is also no information in the passage to support option (c) as the correct answer. Reason: The correct answer is (a) – the government is unwilling to raise prices for fear of being accused of favoring private companies. The author says this towards the end of the second paragraph and says that it would be for political reasons. There is no information in the passage that supports (b) as the correct option. Although the author argues that the government has limited resources and argues that it should not set drug prices, the author does not provide these reasons for the government`s delays in setting drug prices. According to CLAT`s new audit model, here you will find sample questions for legal reasoning.
Following the CLAT preparation tips will help you quickly resolve the questions for the next exam. To become a contract, an agreement must create a legally enforceable legal obligation under the provisions of contract law. Any agreement that does not establish enforceability, i.e. where the parties do not have the right to appeal to the court for breach of contract, is not a contract. This manifests itself in the intention to enter into a legally binding contract that is different from a mere promise. The parties should be aware that if one of them does not fulfill their part of the promise, they will be held responsible for the failure of the contract. The consideration is described as a consideration. It is also crucial for the validity of the Treaty. A promise to do something or give something without consideration is legally unenforceable and therefore invalid. The consideration does not need to be in kind or cash.
A contract without consideration is a betting contract or bet. In addition, the consideration must also be lawful. It is not necessary for these principles to apply only to natural persons, but also to capital companies which are considered to be legal persons. 1.1 Which of the following views can be correctly attributed to the author of the above passage? The correct answer is (a) – the state should not control the price of the drug, as competition in the market would eventually lead to setting a reasonable price. The author explains why the state should not control drug prices in the last paragraph of the passage. The facts presented do not contain any information to suggest that (b) is the correct option. The author does not discuss at all which state provides the ingredients for the drugs, and therefore option (c) may not be correct. Option (d) is also incorrect, as we don`t know what the previous price of the drug was, nor do we know whether people can afford it or not; This option also contradicts the author`s argument that the market would ultimately guarantee that no company makes windfall profits. (a) Challenging the law for violation of the provisions of the Constitution (b) Challenging the law by bringing the case before the courts in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution (c) Both subparagraphs (a) and (b) (d), (a) or (b) 3. The passage given suggests that the fundamental rights provided for in the Indian Constitution are not absolute. This conclusion is as follows: legal aptitude for CLAT has now become an understanding-based aptitude test where questions are indirect and based on inference.
The consortium prepares the questionnaire to logically challenge the students who take the exam. Here are some legal justification questions for CLAT exam preparation. These questions are selected from the previous year`s CLAT questionnaires. 1.2 According to the passage, the Committee, chaired by Judge B.N. Srikrishna, demanded: Reason: The correct answer is c) – the idea of privacy as a fundamental right is not sufficiently addressed in the bill in its current form. The essence of the author`s view is that, despite the landmark decision in K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, which has recognized the right to privacy as a fundamental right, the bill in its current form does not sufficiently protect the individual`s right to privacy. None of the other options represent views consistent with those of the author in the above passage. Question 1. Based on the author`s argument in the above passage, which of the following statements is correct? To give you an idea of the questions asked in this department, we have compiled the legal reasoning questions from previous years. To find solutions to the above questions, watch the given video Rationale: The correct answer is (a) – limiting the reasons why government agencies can act in a way that endangers individuals` right to privacy.
As can be seen from the passage, the committee also anticipated threats to privacy rights posed by government agencies and advocated for safeguards to be put in place to prevent this. The passage indicates that the committee recommended that exemptions for government agencies be “watertight,” “narrow,” and available in “limited circumstances.” (a) is the only option compatible with such a recommendation. 2.3 The State lifts all price restrictions for an essential medicine. Pharmaceutical companies are starting to sell this drug at a price that is almost 5 times the previous price. In such a situation, based on the reasoning of the above author: Legal fitness questions are intended to test your legal reasoning, research ability, and problem-solving ability. The Legal Fitness section is divided into three sections: This section does not require you to be familiar with legalese. However, it will be useful to understand the current law and a fair idea of its application. Read the understanding carefully and answer the questions that arise from it. Practice is the best way to crack CLAT with a high score.
How many questions are asked in the area of CLAT`s Legal Suitability? 2.2 A critical drug, “Formula A”, is used to treat cancer and only one company is involved in its production. If this is true, then based on the author`s reasoning in the above passage: Ans. Approximately 35 to 39 questions are asked from CLAT`s Legal Reasoning section. The issue of obscenity has long irritated courts in India and abroad. The intriguing question has always been the same, that is, what should be the standards for calling something obscene in the eyes of the law? In the United Kingdom, as early as 1868, the Court adopted the Hicklin test in Regina v.