Which of the following is not a negotiable instrument?
Show Hint
- Bill of exchange
- Promissory notes
- Bearer Cheques
- Letter of credit
The Correct Option is D
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Recall the definition of negotiable instruments.
- Negotiable instruments are transferable documents that guarantee payment of a specific amount to the bearer or the order of a specified person.
- Examples: Bill of exchange, Promissory notes, Cheques.
- Letter of credit is a banking instrument used in trade, but it is not transferable in the sense of negotiable instruments.
Top Questions on Business Law
- Where the title in shares of a company is in dispute, the matter has to be resolved by:
- CUET (PG) - 2024
- Commerce
- Business Law
- Out of the following statements, which one is incorrect as regards the Director Identification Number (DIN)?
- CUET (PG) - 2024
- Commerce
- Business Law
- Any general meeting held between two annual general meetings will be called:
- CUET (PG) - 2024
- Commerce
- Business Law
- A company can remove a director before the expiry of the period of his office by passing:
- CUET (PG) - 2024
- Commerce
- Business Law
- The provisions concerning the company auditor are contained in sections 224 to 233B of the Companies Act. Match List-I (Section) with List-II (Dealing with matters):
List-I: Sections List-II: Matters (A) Sec. 227 (I) Right of auditor to attend general meetings (B) Sec. 226 (II) Reading and inspection of auditor’s report (C) Sec. 231 (III) Qualifications and disqualifications of auditors (D) Sec. 230 (IV) Powers and duties of auditors - CUET (PG) - 2024
- Commerce
- Business Law
Questions Asked in CUET PG exam
Match List-I with List-II\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{Provision} & \textbf{Case Law} \\ \hline \text{(A) Strict Liability} & \text{(1) Ryland v. Fletcher} \\ \hline \text{(B) Absolute Liability} & \text{(II) M.C. Mehta v. Union of India} \\ \hline \text{(C) Negligence} & \text{(III) Nicholas v. Marsland} \\ \hline \text{(D) Act of God} & \text{(IV) MCD v. Subhagwanti} \\ \hline \end{array}\]
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Law of Torts
Match List-I with List-II\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{List-1} & \textbf{List-II} \\ \hline \text{(A) Hadley v. Baxendale} & \text{(1) Undue Influence} \\ \hline \text{(B) Henkel v. Pape} & \text{(II) Coercion} \\ \hline \text{(C) Manu Singh v. Umadat Pandey} & \text{(III) Quantum of Damages} \\ \hline \text{(D) Chikkam Amiraju v. Seshamma} & \text{(IV) Mistake} \\ \hline \end{array}\]
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Contract Law
Match List-I with List-II
\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{List-1} & \textbf{List-II} \\ \hline \text{(A) Complete Justice} & \text{(I) Article 137} \\ \hline \text{(B) Special Leave Petition} & \text{(II) Article 131} \\ \hline \text{(C) Review of the Judgments} & \text{(III) Article 142} \\ \hline \text{(D) Original Jurisdiction} & \text{(IV) Article 136} \\ \hline \end{array}\]
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Judicial Process
Match List-I with List-II
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Indian Constitution
Match List-I with List-II
\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{List-1} & \textbf{List-II} \\ \hline \text{(A) Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab} & \text{(I) Separation of powers} \\ \hline \text{(B) Delhi Laws Act, 1912} & \text{(II) Delegated legislation} \\ \hline \text{(C) Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India} & \text{(III) Doctrine of proportionality} \\ \hline \text{(D) Om Kumar v. Union of India} & \text{(IV) Post decisional hearing} \\ \hline \end{array}\]
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- Administrative Law