CA Foundation
Paper 2- Business Laws
Case Studies Questions
By - CA Shantam Gupta
Y ③
company. Their details are as follows:
- O
ABC Limited was registered as a public company. There were 245 members in t
- -
-
·
- -
Directors and their relatives 190
-
--
Employees 15
Ex-employees (shares were allotted when they were employees) E 20
Others ① - -- O 20
(Including 10 joint holders holding shares jointly in the name of father and son)
-
- - -
The Board of directors of the company propose to convert it into a private compa
-
- -
-
Advice whether reduction in the number of members is necessary for conversion.
-
-
(4 Mar
Question 1 By - CA Shantam Gupta
By - CA Shantam Gupta
Ca-Shaan-gupta T
O
467436247
-
=
af have
- Conclusion
Section 2108)
-
of Companies private
As
per Act 2013 a
company
is
incorporated
Since ABC Ad has only 200 members there is
with however
members not
exceeding two hundred employees to
no requirement reduce the number
have
who received shares in course
of employment and employees
below the
statutory requirement
.
has
whose
employment ceased to continue
after receiving
limit
such shares shall not be counted to determine
of
two hundred
.
Similarly Joint holders are treated as one
.
fact
-
The number
of members in ABC limited shall be
determined as
follows :
Particulars Total
Director & Relative 140
Employees N/A
Ex Employees N/A
Joint holders 10
Total 200
-
Ayush, who is a minor, purchased 10 fancy coats for the wedding ceremony of
sister on credit from M/s Surjewala & sons. The cost of all coats was Rs 80,000.(N
-
even a single coat was a necessity. Ayush has assets of worth of Rs.1,00,000. M
-
-
-
Surjewala & sons file a suit against Ayush for recovery of Rs.80,000 out of his asse
-
-
-
Following the provisions of Indian Contract Act, 1872, whether Ayush is liable to pa
-
- -
Rs.80,000 to M/s Surjewala & sons?
- -
(6 Mark
-
Question 2 By - CA Shantam Gupta
By - CA Shantam Gupta
Q2)
tav , 000
100 are available with the minor coats
,
Contract Act 18th
According
An contract
to Section
with
11 and section 6
is
of
void
the
ab initio that is
not
being a
necessity no
recovery is possible
a minor
Y ,
it is void
from the
beingning. However where a
fromossets of Ayush.
contract involves
necessity on
part of the minor the
recovery
can be done
from the assets
who is of the minor
.
It is a
quasi obligation of any personan incompetent
to
contract to recover all expenses from the property or
assets owned by the incompetent partly.
fact
Ayush has been supplied coats worth 80
,000 he is
assets worth
a minor
owing 100, 000
,
the
question is
can
recovery
be done
from the assets
of ay ush .
Conclusion
As provided in the question above ot the coats are not
a
necessity in the contract also stated under section "
,
and 68 that
necessity comprises of only health
,
education,
funeral services and infant treatment . Even if sufficient assets worth
Samar was in search of a second-hand car. For this purpose, he approached “C
Wala 007”, a dealer in pre-owned cars. The sales manager of “Car Wala 007” showe
him three cars which were standing in the parking lane just outside the office. Sam
finalised red Wagon R car. After completing the documenting formalities an
receiving the price of car, sales manager of “Car Wala 007” handed over the key
- -
car to Samar. But when Samar was coming to parking area for picking the car, th
-
- -
electric poll fell on the car which badly damaged the car. Samar claimed that repa
expenses of the car should be borne by “Car Wala 007” as car was not delivered
him.Referring to the provisions-- of the Sales of Goods Act 1930, state who will b
-
liable to get the car repaired?
- (6 Mark
Question 3 By - CA Shantam Gupta
By - CA Shantam Gupta
93)
hav Conclusion
-
to
Section read with Sales Samar
According <(2) section 26
of the of Goods the
owner
of the car shall be liable as the
been
Act 1930 .
keys have handed over
delivery is complete
risk is
transferred any damage
shall now be barne
by
refers related
Symbolic delivery token transfer ofpossession of goods
to te
to the owner which is Samar
.
by document
possing the
goods example transfer
of
title to
of the bill
goods etc or
of lading .
Risk is primor facie transferred
made
with
not
ownership ,
ie
. Irrespective
ofthewhether delivery
is or the risk is
transfered to
G
with
buyer ownership any
loss
resulting thereafter
shall be barne
by the owner
.
itself
fact
On
delivery of keys to te car Samar reached te
parking lot
only to witness that a pole has
damaged the car
by falling
over it
,
now the question is who is liable
for such loss .
Mr. Nikhil has decided to get interior work for his new office. For this purpose, he entered in
-
a contract with M/s Sherry Fine Interiors. It was agreed that M/s Sherry Fine Interiors w
- -
complete the interior work latestT by 31st January, 2023.& On 31st January, 2023, Mr. Nik
-
-
- -
observed that only 20% to 30% work has been completed. He decided to cancel the contra
with M/s- Sherry Fine Interiors. On cancellation of the contract, M/s Sherry Fine Interiors fil
-
-
a suit against Mr. Nikhil for recovery of the cost which it has incurred on the interior work. M
- -
- - -
Nikhil argued that M/s Sherry Fine Interiors did not
- -
complete the work within the time as p
contract and further the work done till 31st January, 2023 by M/s Sherry Fine Interiors was
-
no use for him as he has to appoint a new interior designer. Explain, whether Mr. Nikhil
- - -
liable to pay the cost of work done by M/s Sherry Fine Interiors under the provisions of Indi
- - -
Contract Act, 1872?
2023 (4 Mark
31St Jan
-
20 %
Question 4 By - CA Shantam Gupta
By - CA Shantam Gupta
Qu
have
Conclusion
-
According to section 53
of the Indian Contract Act 1872
Since the work was not completed in
states that
if a
party to a contract fails to
perform a
time
scheduled which Mr
.
there is
nothing
task
by a specificed time the contract becomes voidable
Nikhil is required to
pay
to
Shery Finance
at the option of the promise, it is
only if the parties
as the 20x.-30 %. work done is
of
contract
intered that time is an essential component of the .
substandard will have to be
Suit
quality and
for Quantum Merit is not applicable in cases where
re-done
work specified
by te other
designers
.
quality of work is not as
per
under the contract .
fact
Shery fine interiors has failed to complete the task
given by Mr Nikhil
.
in the stipulated time and the 20 % to 30 % work complete is
also
of no use for Mr
. Nikhil
,
the question is whether
nikhil is responsible for damages
.
⑤ voi 362047
Mr. Samuel agreed to purchase 100 bales of cotton from Mr. Varun, out of his lar
stock and sent his men to take delivery of the goods. They could pack only 60 bale
-
Later on, there was an accidental fire and the entire stock was destroyed including
bales that were already packed. Referring to the provisions of the Sale of Goods A
1930 explain as to who will bear the loss and to what extent?
100 states
(6 Mark
Ascertain
deliverable
Samuel -
transfer-ownership I
Question 5 By - CA Shantam Gupta
By - CA Shantam Gupta
