Generally, time is not of the essence in contracts unless specified. Pick the correct option:

Question

cdquestions Admin · Accepted Answer

The principle under Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 is that time is not automatically of the essence in contracts unless explicitly stated.

Option a) is correct because if the completion of work is crucial to the contract, the parties would typically not agree to an extension of time.

Option b) is correct as well, because agreeing to extend the time indicates that time was not considered essential at the outset.

Option c) is also correct, as clearly stipulating the importance of time in a contract establishes that time is of essence under Section 55.

Therefore, option d) is the correct choice, as all statements accurately reflect the application of Section 55 of the Indian Contract Act.

Answer

If completion of the work, which is the subject matter of the contract, is of essence to the contract, then the parties would not voluntarily extend the time.

Answer

The fact that the parties to the contract agreed to extend the time for the completion of the project indicates that the time was not of essence to the contract, as required under S. 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

Answer

If the party to the contract has clearly and repeatedly stipulated the fact that time is of utmost importance and that the sale consideration needs to be paid on the specified date, it will be established that time is of essence to the contract under S. 55 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

Answer

All of the above are correct.

(A) Conditions for a Hindu Marriage	(i) Section 13
(B) Registration of Hindu Marriage	(ii) Section 10
(C) Judicial Separation	(iii) Section 5
(D) Divorce	(iv) Section 8

I. Arbitration of excepted matters	1. A. Ayyasamy v. A. Paramasivam, (2016) 10 SCC 386
II. Conditional Arbitration Clauses	2. In re - Interplay between Arb Agreements and Stamp Act 2023 INSC 1066
III. Separability of Arbitration Agreement - Kompetenz Kompetenz	3. Vulcan Insurance Co Ltd v. Maharaj Singh and Anr (1976) 1 SCC 943
IV. Arbitrability of fraud	4. Mitra Guha Builders (India) Co v. ONGC (2020) 3 SCC 222

I. Uti Possidetis	1. Principle in customary international law providing that where there has been a fundamental change of circumstances since an agreement was concluded, a party to that agreement may withdraw from or terminate it.
II. Pacta Sunt Servanda	2. Two or more states equally exercise sovereignty with respect to a territory and its inhabitants.
III. Condominium	3. Doctrine that territory remains with the possessor state at the end of war or occupation unless otherwise determined by a treaty or an agreement.
IV. Rebus Sic Stantibus	4. Proposition that treaties are binding upon the parties to them and must be performed in good faith.

Generally, time is not of the essence in contracts unless specified. Pick the correct option:

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

Top Questions on Laws of Contract

Questions Asked in AILET LLM exam