CLAT October 11 Legal Reasoning Practice Questions 2025
CLAT October 11 Legal Reasoning Practice Questions 2025 with answers are available here for appearing candidates.
CLAT October 11 Legal Reasoning Practice Questions 2025: The Common Law Admission Test is a gateway to admission to prestigious National Law Universities across the country. The CLAT October 11 Legal Reasoning Practice Questions 2025 will help the appearing students boost their legal reasoning/aptitude skills which is among the sections that hold a particular significance. Candidates must note that the Legal Reasoning section in CLAT Exams usually comprises around 28-32 Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs), making up approximately 25% of the total CLAT exam. Given its importance, the Clat legal reasoning practice questions 2025 with answers are meticulously designed to evaluate the ability to understand and apply legal principles.
Check More Legal Reasoning Practice Questions: CLAT October 9 Legal Reasoning Practice Questions 2025
CLAT October 11 Legal Reasoning Practice Questions 2025
Candidates must go through these Legal Reasoning Questions for CLAT 2025.
Ques 1: The issue of obscenity is fundamentally related to which of the following?
(a) Freedom of religion to an individual
(b) Freedom of speech and expression to an individual
(c) Right to the privacy of an individual
(d) All of the above
Ques 2: Animus posssidendi means
(a) Intention to harm
(b) Intent to contract
(c) Intention to possess
(d) Intention to return
Ques 3: Principle: Acceptance of a proposal must be absolute and unqualified.
Facts: "A’ made a proposal to sell his motorcycle to ‘B’ for rupees 25,000/-. ‘B’ agreed to buy it for rupees 24,000/-. ‘A’ sold his motorcycle to ‘C’ for 26,000/- the next day. ‘B’ sues ‘A’ for damages.
(a) ‘B’ will get damages from ‘A’.
(b) ‘B’ will get the difference of rupees 1,000/- only.
(c) ‘B’ can proceed against ‘C’.
(d) ‘B’ will not get any damages from ‘A’.
Ques 4: Principle: Every agreement by which any party is restricted absolutely from enforcing his right in respect of any contract by the usual legal proceedings in the ordinary Tribunals, is void to that extent. The law also provides that nobody can confer jurisdiction to a civil court by an agreement between parties.
Facts: A and B entered into a valid contract for rendering certain services. A clause in the contract was that in case of any dispute arose out of the contract it shall be referred to for Arbitration only. Is the contract valid?
(a) Arbitration is also a valid dispute settlement machinery recognized by law, and hence the entire contract is valid.
(b) The parties were trying to confer jurisdiction to some authority to decide a dispute, and hence, the clause would be invalid.
(c) Arbitrator cannot be termed as an ordinary Tribunal. Hence, the agreement is void and would be unenforceable.
(d) The contract is valid, but the clause regarding Arbitration is void.
Ques 5: Which of the following statements is correct in relation to the difference between common intention and similar intention
(a) The intentions of the accused and co-accused can be inferred from the facts and circumstances of each case.
(b) Under common conditions, it is assumed that all the accused have jointly committed the offences themselves and can be jointly liable.
(c) Each accused is liable for the offence he has actually committed if the common intention cannot be proved.
(d) All of the above
Here are the correct answers to the CLAT October 11 Legal Reasoning Practice Questions 2025 given above.
|
Question |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
|
Answer |
b |
c |
d |
a |
d |
It is important to note that the above CLAT October 11 Legal Reasoning Practice Questions 2025 are curated using multiple sources, including the previous year's question papers. With the use of CLAT Legal Reasoning Practice Questions 2024, candidates can enhance their understanding of the exam syllabus, identify areas where they may need to focus and build confidence in their ability to succeed.
Check CLAT Logical Reasoning Practice Questions:
POST YOUR COMMENT