CA Foundation doubts

VVeer

Esay tho hai 1:1 ayega

Read full answer →

MMegha

Yess

Read full answer →

VVarsha.

After watching the class of a unit, try to solve min 10 cases by ur own ask questions in chatgpt, or icai website or here also. Last 3 units are important try to do more case studies in that units

Read full answer →

BrunoAI answer

Ascertainment of price is covered by Sections 9 and 10 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930. Section 9: Price can be: 1. Fixed by the contract itself. 2. Left to be fixed in an agreed manner. 3. Decided by the course of dealing between the parties. If none of these applies, the buyer pays a reasonable price. Section 10 (valuation by a third party): - If the third party fails to fix the price, the agreement is void. - If goods were already delivered and used by the buyer, the buyer pays a reasonable price. - If a party's fault stops the valuation, the other party can sue for damages. For practice questions, try the Law question banks in notes [1] and [4] below.

Read full answer →

MMadhu

Ascertainment is how price of the goods is decided in the contract Section 9 1.It is already mentioned in the contract (fixed) 2.Parties agree to fix it in specific manner 3.by course of dealing between parties Section 10 - By third party If the third party refuses to ascertain price ,and goods haven't been delivered then the contract becomes void But if goods have already been delivered, reasonable price must be ascertained If either seller or buyer is preventing the valuer from ascertainin the price he /she can be sued by other party for damages

Read full answer →

BrunoAI answer

1. Right of subrogation (Sec. 140, Indian Contract Act, 1872): once the surety pays the guaranteed debt or performs the promise, he steps into the creditor's shoes. He gets all the rights the creditor had against the principal debtor. 2. Implied promise to indemnify surety (Sec. 145): every contract of guarantee carries an implied promise by the principal debtor to repay the surety. He can recover any sum he rightfully paid, but not any sum he paid wrongfully. Example: A borrows Rs 1,00,000 from a bank and pledges gold. B is the surety. A defaults and B pays the bank. - Subrogation: B can now sue A and claim the pledged gold, just as the bank could. - Indemnity: B can recover the Rs 1,00,000 from A. But if B defended the bank's suit without reasonable cause, he cannot recover those costs from A.

Read full answer →

KKamal

Yes mr a can recoverd the good damages

Read full answer →

SSonu

Mathematics

Read full answer →

VVeer

Uploaded on my profile

Read full answer →

CChandan

Go to challenge option

Read full answer →

NNoori· 1 found helpful

Implied Conditions under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 Meaning: Implied conditions are conditions which are automatically included in a contract of sale by law, even if they are not expressly mentioned by the parties. There are 5 important implied conditions: 1\. Condition as to Title (Section 14(a)) – The seller must have the legal right to sell the goods. 2\. Sale by Description (Section 15) – Goods must correspond with the description given by the seller. 3\. Sale by Sample (Section 17) – The goods supplied must correspond with the sample shown to the buyer. 4\. Sale by Sample as well as Description (Section 15) – Goods must correspond with both the sample and the description. 5\. Condition as to Quality or Fitness (Section 16): * Fitness for Buyer's Purpose – Goods must be suitable for the buyer's particular purpose when the legal requirements are satisfied. * Merchantable Quality – Goods must be of acceptable and usable quality. * Wholesomeness – Food items must be safe for consumption. Important exam point: Implied conditions may be waived by the buyer or varied by an express agreement, subject to applicable law. *Easy way to remember T – D – S – SD – Q .

Read full answer →

BrunoAI answer

Section 228 applies here, not Section 233. Z will not succeed against X. 1. Section 227: if the authorised part can be separated from the excess, the principal is bound only for the authorised part. 2. Section 228: if they cannot be separated, the principal is not bound at all. 3. Here Y bought a single item for ₹12 lakhs against a ₹10 lakh limit. One item cannot be split into ₹10 lakh plus ₹2 lakh, so X is not liable. The discount or benefit to X does not change this. 4. Z can recover from Y, who exceeded his authority. Z could also claim from X if X ratifies the purchase. Section 233 applies only where the agent is personally liable. Then the third party may sue the agent, the principal, or both. That is not the issue here.

Read full answer →