What is the difference between Sec 237 and Sec 188 of the ICA, 1872?  Both of these sections seem to be talking about the scope of the authority of the agent for acts committed without the prior consent of the Principal.

Sec 154 of the Evidence Act pertains to the questioning of one's own witness and relying on that evidence. Ques: What essential change was made in Section 154 of Indian Evidence Act, 1872 vide Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2005? Why was the change required? 

Section 166 of Indian Contract Act 1872: “Bailee not responsible on redelivery to bailor without title” 166. If the bailor has no title to the goods, and the bailee, in good faith, delivers them back to, or according to the directions of, the bailor, the bailee is not responsible to the owner in respect of such delivery. Ques- Can the bailee be sued for not delivering goods to the real owner as he assumes another person to be the real owner in good faith?

The words 'intention' and 'object' are often used synonymously in the day-to-day parlance. Under the Indian Penal Code, both of these terms have been employed under different sections, with different connotations and understanding. Sec 34 uses the phrase 'common intention'. On the other hand, while defining unlawful assembly, Sec 149 used the phrase 'common object'. Ques: What are the differences between Sec 34 (Common Intention) and Sec 149 (Common Object)? 

We gradually induce the habit of observation and questioning by beginning with a simple exercise pertaining to the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Indian Contract Act is one of the basic statutes that is studied in the first few semesters of the law school. It is ever-relevant in the practice of the law. Ques: What is the difference between consideration and reciprocal promise? Is every consideration a reciprocal promise, or vice-versa? Background: Sec 2(d) defines 'Consideration' as - "When, at the desire of the promisor, the promisee or any other person has done or abstained from doing, or does or abstains from doing, or promises to do or to abstain from doing, something, such act or abstinence or promise is called a consideration for the promise." Sec 2 (f) defines 'Reciprocal Promises' as - "Promises which form the consideration or part of the consideration for each other, are called reciprocal promises"    

Section 415 to Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 deals with the offence of cheating. These sections frequently use the term “deceiving any person”. Ques: What is the meaning of "deceiving any person" as mentioned in the definition of cheating?

Common intention has been defined under Sec 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Ques: Does the element of common intention require the existence of 'same intention' or 'similar intention'?   

The Indian Evidence Act contains many provisions dedicated to the admissibility and relevance of signs, seals, official documents, judgments, acts and laws of the United Kingdom and other commonwealth countries.  Ques: Why were these considered relevant in Indian courts? 

The Indian Contract Act considers contingent contracts as valid. It enlists certain situations where such contracts become enforceable. Ques: Whether contracts of Insurance are contingent contracts? When do they become enforceable? 

Sec 81 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 explains the general exception of necessity. The section says, "Nothing is an offence merely by reason of its being done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause harm, if it be done without any criminal intention to cause harm, and in good faith for the purpose of preventing or avoiding other harm to person or property." There are two key-words which point towards the mental state of the actor, under this provision - "knowledge" and "intention". Clearly, the lawmakers used these two distinct terms to emphasize upon the degree of variation in the mental state. Ques: What is the difference between "knowledge" and "intention" as per Sec 81 of IPC?     

Sec 76 and Sec 79 deal with mistakes of fact under General Exceptions laid down by the Indian Penal Code. The difference between the section is highlighted by the usage of the phrases "bound by law" and "justified by law". Ques: What is the distinction between Sec 76 and 79 of the IPC?

Under the Muslim personal law, a Muslim man is allowed to have more than one wives. A wife, once divorced, may be taken back into marriage by her husband after performing the ritual of Nikah Halala. Nikah Halala involves the cohabitation between the said wife and another man. The practice of indulging in a sexual act with the wife of another constitutes adultery. Prior to 2018, it was a punishable offence under the Indian Penal Code. Ques: Whether Nikah Halala constitutes an act along the lines of adultery? Why, or Why not? 

Sec 233 of the Indian Contract Act elucidates the rights of a person dealing with an agent personally liable. Question: Even when an agent is personally liable, can a third party still go on to sue the principal? If yes, in which cases is it possible?    

The contract of guarantee is entered into with surety provided that there is an existing contract between Creditor and Principal debtor. It is provided that surety’s liability is co- extensive with that of principal-debtor. Ques: Individually, how can the Surety protect his own interest while protecting the interest of Creditor?

Chapter V of the Indian Contracts Act enlists certain relations that resemble contracts. Under English law, these are known as Quasi-contracts. Ques: How are quasi-contracts different from contracts? Why are they enforceable? 

Section 96 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 reads as follows: "Things done in private defence - Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence." This section means the act done in order to prevent yourself from harm will not be an offence. Right to private defence is applicable only when the act done is equivalent to the injury you would have got if you didn’t exercise your right to private defence. Ques: Is right of private defence available in a free fight?

Under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, the finder of goods has rights and responsibilities similar to that of a bailee. Section 168 states that, ".... where the owner has offered a specific reward for the return of goods lost, the finder may sue for such reward, and may retain the goods until he receives it." Suppose, a child ran away from his home. His father sent his servants in search of the child. After that, he announced the reward of Rs 5,000 for whoever traces his child. The servant finds his child, not knowing about the reward. Later he claims the reward under Section 168. Can the servant refuse to send the child back in the custody of his father until he receives the award, according to this Section?

Sec 151 of the Indian Contract Act explains that "bailee is bound to take as much care of the goods bailed to him as a man of ordinary prudence". Ques: Is the Bailee liable for the loss of goods even if he takes reasonable care of the goods? What about when he agrees to take special care of goods? 

Unsoundness of mind, commonly referred to as insanity, is a general defense under Sec 84 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. However, the Statute nowhere defines these terms. Ques: Does insanity always apply to mentally ill persons?