CAMPUS LAW CENTRE

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

The Consolidated Syllabus

of Ist Semester for Faculty of Law

TEAM
ANKITT SIHAG
Study Material CLC Announcement

For Soft Copy For College Circular

and notices

CONTACT: 8307527080, 9653559299

 LL.B. I Term
LB-101 - Jurisprudence-I
(Legal Method, Indian Legal System and Basic Theories of Law)

Cases Selected and Edited by

Mahavir Singh
Alka Chawla
Anumeha Mishra
Amrendra K. Ajit
Anita Yadav
Ashish Kumar
Archa Vashistha
Apanjot Kaur
Ashutosh Acharya
Ajay Sonawane
Daya Devi
Gurpreet Singh
Harleen Kaur
Kailash Kurmi
Santosh Upadhyay
Shakti K Aggarwal
Shourie Anand
Pushkar Anand
Rubina Grewal Nagra
Upendra Nath
Silky Mukherjee

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI, DELHI- 110 007

January, 2023

(For private use only in the course of instruction)

 Rubric for Theory Exam Papers:

'All the theory papers, except for CLE subjects*, for LL.B. semester exams carry 100

marks each, for which the University of Delhi conducts an end semester descriptive

exam of 3 hours duration. A typical theory question paper contains 8 questions printed

both in English and Hindi languages. The student is required to answer 5 out of 8

questions. Each question carries equal marks, that is 20 marks each. Hence the

maximum marks for each paper is 100. A student has to secure a minimum of 45 marks

out of 100 to pass a paper.

Answers may be written either in English or in Hindi but the same medium should be

used throughout the paper.'

*****************************************************************
 ii

Course Name: Jurisprudence- I (Legal Method)

Course Code: LB-101
Course Objectives:

 To give an overview to the students about law and legal systems prevalent in
the world and India in particular, so that they can understand the jurisprudence
of all subjects taught to them over a span of three years.
 To learn the jurisprudential basis of various concepts which are continuously
being dealt within law in all manifestations.
 To sensitize the students to adopt a pragmatic approach in studying all the
subjects in the six semesters by teaching them how to read cases and ways to
club theory with practice. It is a subject which forms the foundation of the law
degree.
 To make the students trace the evolution of law and legal systems in different
countries.
 To familiarize the students with linkage of law with other social science such
as psychology, history sociology, economics history etc.
 To familiarize the students with the growth of legal profession in India and the
laws governing the profession.

Learning Outcomes

 Students will be acquainted with the basic ideas and fundamental principles of
Law in the given society.
 Knowledge of Law and Legal precepts will help the students to face
exigencies of life boldly and courageously.
 Students will be inculcated with standards of ideal for human conduct in terms
of law for the maintenance of Public conscience.
 Students will be able to identify such pressing demand or problems which
require solution within the parameters of the law, justice and other social
norms.
Course Content:

1 a. Major Legal Systems Of The World

b. Indian Legal System

(i) N.R. Madhava Menon, Our Legal System 01

(ii) Rene David & J.E.C. Brierley, Major Legal Systems in the World Today 08
rd
17-31, 484-515 3 ed. 1985
(iii) Joseph Minatur, Indian Legal System, “Introduction vii-xiv (2nd ed. 2006) 14

2. Structure Of Indian Legal System, Basic Principles Of Law And Rule Of Law
(I) Hierarchy Of Courts And Jurisdiction 19
(Ii) Legal Services And Lok Adalat 22
(Iii) Dicey’s Rule Of Law. 38
(Iv) Doctrine Of Separation Of Powers And Its Applicability In India 45
(V) Method Of Legal Study And Rules Of Interpretation Glanville Williams, Learning
The Law, Chapter 7, “The Interpretation Of Statutes” pp. 97-108 (11th ed., 12th Indian
Reprint 2006) 49

3. A. Sources Of Law
a. Custom
b. Legislation
c. Precedent

B. Legal Profession In India

(i) M.P. Jain, “Custom As A Source Of Law In India”, 3 Jaipur Law Journal
96 (1963) 56
(ii) Dias, Jurisprudence, Chapter 7, Justice In Deciding Disputes pp. 126-164
(Ed. 5, 2013) 78
 iv

(iii) Glanville Williams, Learning The Law, Chapter 6, Learning The

Techniques PP. 67-79 (11th Ed.,12th Indian Reprint 2006) 106
(iv) Advocates Act, 1961
A.N. Veera Raghavan, “Legal Profession And The Advocates Act, 1961, 14
Journal Of The Indian Law Institute pp. 228-262 (1972) 114

4. Positive/Analytical School Of Thought

 John Austin, Province Of Jurisprudence Determined 128
 H.L.A. Hart, Concept Of Law, “Law As The Union Of Primary And Secondary Rules”
And “The Foundation Of A Legal System”. 155 and 168

5. Hans Kelsen, “Pure Theory Of Law” 175

6. Historical And Sociological School Of Thought 208

 Karl Von Savigny
 Roscoe Pound 221
7. Judicial Process Applying Theories Of Law,
Lon. L. Fuller, The Case Of Speluncean Explore”, 62 Harvard Law Review” 616-664 (1949).
227
8. Rights And Duties Dias, Jurisprudence, “Concept Of Rights And Duties: Jurisprudential
Analysis. 247

IMPORTANT NOTE:

1. The topics, cases and suggested readings given above are not exhaustive. The
Committee of teachers teaching the Course shall be at liberty to revise the
topics/case/suggested readings.
2. Students are required to study/refer to the legislations as amended from time to
time, and consult the latest editions of books.

****
 Questions to Ponder

Unit 1
1. Discuss the major legal systems of the world and their impact on development
of India’s legal system?
2. What are the major components of Indian Legal System?

Unit 2
1. Discuss the importance of Legal Aid and Lok Adalat as a means of providing
easy access to Justice.
2. To what extent Dicey, writing in ‘Introduction to the Study of Law of the
Constitution’(1885) has been influential in establishing the rule of law within
the 19th century? Is application of rule of law a myth or reality in India?
3. Elaborate various rules of interpretation of the statues.
4. How does the system of checks and balances reinforce the separation of
powers? Discuss the application of theory of separation of powers in India.
5. Explain the hierarchy of Court System in India and their Jurisdiction .

Unit 3

1. Briefly discuss the objectives and the main features of The Advocates Act,
1961.

Unit 4

1. Critically examine Austin’s view on Sovereignty. How is a sovereign

identified in the command theory of law? Also discuss the existence of a
sovereign as a postulate in the current scenario in India.
 vi

2. ‘Not all laws are expression of a wish by a sovereign, that some others behave
in a certain way.’ In the light of the given statement discuss Hart’s ‘Concept of
Law’. How does he define the two types of Rules and what is the difference
between the two rules?

Unit 5

1. What is role of sanctions in Kelsen’s legal order? Does it differ from Austin’s
idea of sanctions?
2. Can we locate a Grundnorm in the Indian Legal System?
3. Are there any similarities and/or differences between HLA Hart’s Rule of
Recognition and Kelsen’s Grundnorm?

Unit 6

1. Why did Savigny argue that legislation was subordinate to custom? Does
Savigny’s approach towards custom differ from the approach of positivists
like Austin and Hart?
2. How far is the concept of ‘Volksgeist’ relevant in contemporary legal
discourse?
3. Does Pound’s sociological jurisprudence challenge the idea of law
propounded by the ‘Positivists’?

Unit 7

1. The Speluncean Explorer's case provides a window to look into the process of
judicial decision making, use any of the two given doctrines to show how the
judges differed from each other in either reasoning or decision making while
deciding the fate of the explorers.

a) doctrine of separation of powers and the morality of legalism.

b) varying rules of interpretation.

c) Judges of the Supreme Court are to provide justice to the people and not
merely provide judgement applying the law of the land in the given situation.

Unit 8

1. How does Hohfeld’s jural relations help in judicial reasoning and decision?
2. Is it possible to state legal problems with the help of Hohfeld’s eight
fundamental conceptions? Explain these conceptions with the aid of examples.
 LL.B. I Term

Principles of Contract
(General Principles)

Cases Selected and Edited by

Raman Mittal
Rajni Abbi
Gunjan Gupta
Neha Aneja
Swati Solanki

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI, DELHI-110007
January, 2023

(For private use only in the course of instruction)

 Rubric for Theory Exam Papers:

'All the theory papers, except for CLE subjects*, for LL.B. semester exams carry 100

marks each, for which the University of Delhi conducts an end semester descriptive

exam of 3 hours duration. A typical theory question paper contains 8 questions printed

both in English and Hindi languages. The student is required to answer 5 out of 8

questions. Each question carries equal marks, that is 20 marks each. Hence the

maximum marks for each paper is 100. A student has to secure a minimum of 45 marks

out of 100 to pass a paper.

Answers may be written either in English or in Hindi but the same medium should be

used throughout the paper.'

*****************************************************************
 ii

Semester- First
Course Name- Law of Contract
Course Code- LB-CC-102
(Compulsory Paper)
Core course: 5 credits Classes 64 (4 Classes/ week + Tutorial)

The law relating to contracts is one of the basic laws to be studied by every law student the
world over. The law of contracts touches equally upon the lives of ordinary persons and the
activities of business whether organized on small or large scale. For any lawyer this branch of
law is extremely important and without a sound understanding of the underlying principles it
is impossible to succeed in his career.

This branch of law deals with law relating to promises, their formation, performance and
enforceability. It is scattered over several legislations. There are special legislations dealing
with particular contractual relationship, e.g. The Sale of Goods Act, 1930, The Partnership
Act, 1932. And there are various laws that contain certain special provisions for particular
situations. However, this paper will include a study of general principles of contracts spelt out
in sections 1-75 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 together with certain provisions of related
legislations and Common Law.

Objectives of the Course:

 To acquaint the students with fundamental concepts of law relating to contracts.
 To study the Indian statutes specifically relating to contracts and to analyse the legal
provisions through case laws and the related reference material.
 To study the practical application of law relating to contracts.

Course Outcomes:

The students will be able to learn and understand:

 The system of formation and discharge of contracts in India and the role of courts in
enforcing them.
 The concept of voluntarily created civil obligations.
 Synthesis of case laws, identification of issues, applicability of relevant provisions
and critical analysis of the judicial decisions with reference to the Indian Contract
Act, 1872, the Specific Relief Act, 1963, the Indian Majority Act, 1875, and the
Information Technology Act, 2000.
 iii

 Tracing the existing legal framework through latest Judgments and applicability of
provisions in the evolving as well as technological driven society.

Teaching Methodology:

 The course will be conducted through lectures, presentations and discussions.

o Class Room Teaching- 52 classes
o Presentations/discussions- 12 classes

CONTENTS

Prescribed Legislations:
(1) The Indian Contract Act, 1872
(2) The Specific Relief Act, 1963
(3) The Indian Majority Act, 1875
(4) The Information Technology Act, 2000

Prescribed Books:
(1) Pollock & Mulla, Indian Contract & Specific Relief Act (edited by R Yashod
Vardhan and Chitra Narayan) 15th Ed. 2017

(2) J. Beatson, Anson’s Law of Contract (28th ed., 2002)

(3) H.K. Saharay, Dutt on Contract – The Indian Contract Act, 1872
(10th ed., 2006)
(4) Avtar Singh, Law of Contract and Specific Relief (11th ed., 2013)
(5) Sachin Rastogi, Insights into E-Contracts in India, 2014
(6) R K Singh, Law Relating to Electronic Contracts, 2013

Recommended Reading:
(7) M.P.Furmston, Cheshire, Fifoot and Furmston’s, Law of Contract (15th ed., 2007)

Topic 1 : 2 classes
General Introduction – History and Nature of Contractual Obligations
 iv

Topic 2 : 6 classes
Formation of an Agreement Intention to create legal relationship; offer and invitation to treat;
kinds of offer, communication, acceptance and revocation of offer and acceptance; modes of
revocation of offer - Indian Contract Act, 1872, sections 2 – 10

Cases

1. Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1891-4) All ER Rep.127 1

2. Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain v. Boots Cash Chemist
(Southern) Ltd. (1952) 2 All ER Rep. 456 8
3. Balfour v. Balfour (1918-19) All ER 860 (CA) 11
4. Lalman Shukla v. Gauri Datt (1913) XL ALJR 489 (All.) 15
5. Bhagwandas Goverdhandas Kedia v. M/s. Girdharilal
Parshottamdas & Co., AIR 1966 SC 543 17
6. Harvey v. Facey (1893) AC 552 28
7. Felthouse v.Bindley (1862) 11 CB 869 29

Topic 3 : 3 classes

Making of an Agreement – Special Situations Tenders and Auctions- Indian Contract Act,
1872, sections 2-10

Cases:

8. Union of India v. Maddala Thathiah, AIR 1966 SC 1724 30

9. Rajendra Kumar Verma v. State of M.P., AIR 1972 MP 131 36
10. Kanhaiya Lal Aggarwal v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 2766 37
11. Haridwar Singh v. Bagun Sumbrui (1973) 3 SCC 889 39
12. Indian Airlines Corporation v. Sm. Madhuri Chowdhuri,
AIR 1965 Cal. 252 42

Topic 4 : 5 classes

Consideration Meaning; basis and the nature of consideration; Doctrine of Privity of

Contract and of consideration, its exceptions; Exceptions of consideration – Indian Contract
Act, 1872, sections 2(d), 2(f), 23 and 25
13. Kedarnath Bhattacharji v. Gorie Mahomed (1886) 7 I.D. 64 (Cal.) 54
14. Doraswami Iyer v. Arunachala Ayyar (1935) 43 LW 259 (Mad.) 56
15. Abdul Aziz v. Masum Ali, AIR 1914 All. 22 58
16. Venkata Chinnaya Rau v. Venkataramaya Garu
(1881) 1 ID 137 (Mad.) 60
17. Nawab Khwaja Muhammad Khan v. Nawab Husaini Begam
(1910) LR 37 I.A. 152 62
 v

Topic 5 : 5 classes

Capacity to Contract Legal disability to enter into contract - Minors, persons of unsound mind
; person under legal disability; lunatics, idiots; Restitution in cases of minor’s agreement;
Liability for necessaries supplied to the minor - Indian Contract Act, 1872, sections 10, 11,
12, 64, 65, 68; Specific Relief Act, 1963, section 33; Indian Majority Act, 1875
18. Mohori Bibee v. Dhurmodas Ghose (1903) 30 I.A. 114 65
19. Khan Gul v. Lakha Singh, AIR 1928 Lah. 609 69
20. Ajudhia Prasad v. Chandan Lal, AIR 1937 All. 610 78

Topic 6 : 7 classes

Free Consent Free consent ; Definition – Coercion, Undue influence, Fraud,

Misrepresentation and Mistake; Effect on contracts influenced by any factor vitiating free
consent - Indian Contract Act, 1872, sections 13 – 22
Cases
21. Raghunath Prasad v. Sarju Prasad (1923) 51 I.A. 101 87
22. Subhas Chandra Das Mushib v. Ganga Prasad Das Mushib,
AIR 1967 SC 878 90
23. Lakshmi Amma v. T. Narayana Bhatta, 1970 (3) SCC 159 94
24. Tarsem Singh v. Sukhminder Singh (1998) 3 SCC 471 100

Topic 7 : 5 classes

Limitations on Freedom of Contract Circumstances in which agreements become void or

voidable, Distinction between void and voidable agreements; Unlawful Agreements; Public
policy; Agreements with unlawful consideration in part and objects; Agreements without
consideration; Agreements in restraint of marriage; Agreements in restraint of trade;
Agreements in restraint of legal proceedings; Ambiguous and uncertain agreements &
Wagering agreements -Indian Contract Act, 1872, sections 23 – 30
Cases
25. Gherulal Parakh v. Mahadeodas Maiya, AIR 1959 SC 781 106
26. Niranjan Shankar Golikari v. Century Spinning & Manufacturing
Co. Ltd., AIR 1967 SC 1098 119
 vi

27. Central Inland Water Transport Corpn. Ltd. v. Brojo Nath Ganguly
(1986) 3 SCC 156 128
(Also see D.T.C. v. D.T.C. Mazdoor Congress, AIR 1991 SC 101;
Bank of India v. O.P. Swarankar, AIR 2003 SC 858)
28. Dhurandhar Prasad Singh v. Jai Prakash University,
AIR 2001 SC 2552 145

Topic 8 : 8 classes

Discharge of a Contract Modes-Discharge by performance; Frustration; Supervening

impossibility of performance; Grounds of Frustration and its effect; Discharge by Agreement
and Novation - Indian Contract Act, 1872, sections 37 – 67

Cases

29. Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur & Co., AIR 1954 SC 44 148
30. M/s. Alopi Parshad & Sons Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1960 SC 588 158
31. Punj Sons Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1986 Del. 158 162
32. Easun Engineering Co. Ltd. v. The Fertilizers & Chemicals
Travancore Ltd., AIR 1991 Mad. 158 167

Topic 9 : 6 classes

Remedies for Breach of Contract (a) Damages; Types of Damages; Basis of Assessment of
Damages; Remoteness of Damages and (b) Measures of Damages; Mitigation of Damages;
Penalty & Liquidated Damages – Indian Contract Act, 1872, sections 73 – 74

Cases
33. Hadley v. Baxendale (1843-60) All ER Rep. 461 172
34. AKAS Jamal v. Moolla Dawood, Sons & Co. (1915) XX C.W.N. 105 175
35. Karsandas H. Thacker v. M/s. The Saran Engineering Co. Ltd.,
AIR 1965 SC 1981 178
36. Maula Bux v. Union of India, AIR 1970 SC 1955 182
37. Shri Hanuman Cotton Mills v. Tata Air Craft Ltd., 1969 (3) SCC 522 186
38. Ghaziabad Development Authority v. Union of India,
AIR 2000 SC 2003 196
 vii

39. Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd.
(2003) 4 SCALE 92 200

Topic 10 : 3 classes

Quasi – Contracts Obligations resembling those created by Contract (Quasi – Contracts):

Concept and classification - Indian Contract Act, 1872, sections 68 – 72

Cases
40. State of West Bengal v. B.K. Mondal & Sons, AIR 1962 SC 779 211

Topic 11 : 2 classes

E- Contracts Nature and scope; Formation of E-contracts; Legislative Framework; Judicial

Approach – The Information Technology Act, 2000, sections 3--5, 10--17.

Cases

41. P R Transport Agency v. Union of India, AIR 2006 ALL 23

42. Timex International Fze Ltd Dubai v. Vedanta Aluminium Ltd. (2010)
3 SCC 1

IMPORTANT NOTE:

1. The topics, cases and suggested readings given above are not exhaustive. The
Committee of teachers teaching the Course shall be at liberty to revise the
topics/case/suggested readings.
2. Students are required to study/refer to the legislations as amended from time to time,
and consult the latest editions of books.

****
 LL.B. I Term

LB-103-Law of Torts Including Motor Vehicles

Accidents and Consumer Protection Laws

Cases Selected and Edited by:

Sarbjit Kaur
Shabnam
Siddhartha Mishra
Monica Chaudhary
Shakti Kumar Agarwal
Stanzin Chostak
Shivani Singh

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI, DELHI- 110007
July, 2022

For private use only in the course of instruction

 ii

LL. B. I Term
Paper- LB-103 – Law of Torts Including Motor Vehicles Accidents and
Consumer Protection Laws

The Law of Torts is primarily concerned with redressal of wrongful civil actions by
awarding compensation. In a society where men live together, conflicts of interests are bound
to occur and they may from time to time cause damage to one or the other. In addition, with the
rapid industrialization, tortious liability has come to be used against manufacturers and
industrial units. The Law of Torts had originated from Common Law and by and large this
branch of law continues to be uncodified. Tortious liability has been codified only to a very
limited extent such as workmen’s compensation, motor vehicle accidents, environmental
degradation, consumer protection and the like.
As the Law of Torts is basically a judge made law, students are required to study it in
the light of judicial pronouncements. They are required to equip themselves with the latest
developments extending to the entire course.

Prescribed Books:
1. W.V.H. Rogers, Winfield & Jolowicz on Tort (Sweet & Maxwell, 19th edn., 2016).
2. R.F.V.Heuston and R.A. Buckley, Salmond & Heuston on The Law of Torts (Sweet
& Maxwell, 21st edn., 1996).
3. G.P.Singh and Akshay Sapre , Ratanlal & Dhirajlal The Law of Torts (Lexis
Nexis, 28th edn., 2019).
4. Avtar Singh (Rev.), P.S. Atchuthen Pillai Law of Torts (Eastern Book Company,
9th edn., 2008).
5. Tony Weir, A Casebook on Tort (Sweet & Maxwell, 10th edn., 2004).

PART A: LAW OF TORTS

Topic 1 : Introduction : Definition, Nature and Scope
(a) Origin and Development of Law of Torts in England – Forms of action; specific
remedies from case to case.
(b) Evolution of Law of Torts in India- uncodified and judge-made; advantages and
disadvantages.
(c) Meaning and function of Law of Torts- Prescribing standards of human conduct,
redressal of wrongs by payment of compensation, injunction.
(d) Definition of tort
(e) Constituents of tort – wrongful act, legal damage and remedy – injuria sine damno
and damnum sine injuria ;ubi jus ibi remedium
(f) Tort vis-a-vis other wrongs e.g. crime, breach of contract, etc.
 iii

(g) Relevance of intention, motive and malice in Law of Torts

1. White v. John Warrick & Co., Ltd., (1953) 2 All ER 1021 1
2. Town Area Committee v. Prabhu Dayal, AIR 1975 All. 132 5
3. P. Seetharamayya v. G. Mahalakshmamma, AIR 1958 AP 103 7
4. Rajkot Municipal Corporation v. Manjulben Jayantilal Nakum & ors.
1997 (9) SCC 552 12
5. Ashby v. White (1703) 2 Lord Raym 938
6. Municipal Corpn. of Agra v. Asharfi Lal, AIR 1921 All. 202
7. Mayor of Bradford Corpn. v. Pickles (1895) AC 587
8. Gloucester Grammar School case (1410) Y.B. 11 hen. IV of 47

Topic 2: Defences against Tortious Liability

(a) Consent as defence – volenti non fit injuria – Essentials for the application of the
defence;
Exceptions to the defence – Rescue cases and Unfair Contract Terms Act, 1977 (U K)
(b) Statutory authority
(c) Act of God/vis major
9. Smith v. Charles Baker and Sons (1891) AC 325 (HL) 25
10. South Indian Industrial Ltd., Madras v. Alamelu Ammal,
AIR 1923 Mad. 565 30
11. Haynes v. Harwood (1935) 1 K B 146 31
12. Ramchandraram Nagaram Rice & Oil Mills Ltd. v. Municipal
Commissioners of Purulia Municipality, AIR 1943 Pat. 408 36
13. Manindra Nath Mukherjee v. Mathuradas Chatturbhuj,
AIR 1946 Cal. 175 40
14. Hall v. Brooklands Auto Racing Club (1932) 1 KB 205
15. T.C. Balakrishnan v. T.R. Subramanian, AIR 1968 Ker. 151

Topic 3: Negligence – Liability at Common Law and Statutory Law

(a) Theories of Negligence
(b) Meaning and Definition
(c) Essential Ingredients – duty to take care, breach of duty, consequent damage
(d) Proof of Negligence- Res ipsa loquitor
(e) Manufacturer’s Negligence
(f) Medical Negligence

16. Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932) All ER Rep. 1 47

17. Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Subhagwanti, AIR 1966 SC 1750 53
18. Pinnamaneni Narasimha Rao v. Gundavarapu Jayaprakasu, 56
 iv

AIR 1990 AP 207

19. Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab (2005) 6 SCC 1 67
20. Malay Kumar Ganguly v. Sukumar Mukherjee AIR 2010 SC 1162 87
21. Khenyei v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. – (2005) 9 SCC 273 103

Topic 4: Nervous Shock

(a) Meaning
(b) Impact theory- From personal injury, from property damage
(c) Foreseeability of psychiatric illness
(d) Immediate aftermath test
(e) Primary victims, secondary victims

22. Hambrook v. Stokes Bros. (1924) All ER Rep. 110 108

23. (Hay or) Bourhill v. Young (1942) 2 All ER 396 (HL) 113
24. McLoughlin v. O’Brian (1982) 2 All ER 907 (HL) 116
25. Alcock v. Chief Constable of the South Yorkshire Police 130
(1991) 4 All ER 907 (HL)
26. Page v. Smith (1995) 2 All ER 736
27. Dulieu v. White (1901) 2 KB 669
28. King v. Phillips (1953) 1 QB 429

Topic 5: Remoteness of Damage

(a) Causation- But for test, concurrent causes, consecutive causes, proof of causation
(b) Novus actus interveniens
(c) Tests of Remoteness of Damage- Natural and proximate consequence, directness
and foreseeability
(d) Eggshell Skull Rule

29. In Re An Arbitration between Polemis and Furness, Withy & Co.

(1921) All ER Rep. 40 148
30. Overseas Tankship [UK] Ltd. v. Morts Dock & Engineering Co.
[The Wagon Mound] (1961) 1 All ER 404 150
31. Hughes v. Lord Advocate (1963) AC 837 154
32. Smith v. Leech Brain & Co. (1961) 3 All ER 1159

Topic 6 : No Fault Liability– Strict and Absolute Liability

(a) Meaning and rationale of no fault liability
(b) Rule of Strict Liability- Rule in Rylands v. Fletcher- origin, scope and exceptions,
 v

Application of the Rule in India

(c) Rule of Absolute Liability in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
(d) Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster case
(e) No fault liability under the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
(f) No fault liability in hit and run cases under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
33. Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) LR 3 HL 330. 164
34. M. C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086. 169
35. M. P. Electricity Board v. Shail Kumar, AIR 2002 SC 551. 176
36. The Madras Railway Co. v. The Zemindar of Carvatenagarum,
LR (1874) 1 IA 364

Topic 7: Vicarious Liability of the State

(a) Meaning and basis of vicarious liability- Position in England and India
(b) Government Liability in Torts – (1) Constitutional Provisions; (2) Sovereign and non-
sovereign functions
(c) Law Commission of India, “First Report on the Liability of the State in Tort” (May,
1956)
(d) Violation of Fundamental Rights and sovereign immunity, Concept of Constitutional
torts

37. State of Rajasthan v. Vidhyawati (1962) Supp. 2 SCR 989 178

38. Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain v. State of U. P. (1965) 1 SCR 375 186
39. N. Nagendra Rao & Co. v. State of A. P., AIR 1994 SC 2663 195
40. Chairman, Railway Board v. Chandrima Das (2002) 2 SCC 465 207
Topic 8: Defamation
(a) Meaning- Libel and slander
(b) Essential Conditions
(c) Defences- Justification by truth, fair and bonafide comments, privilege (absolute and
qualified), consent and apology

41. Prof. Imtiaz Ahmad v. Durdana Zamir (2009) 109 DRJ 357 212
42. Tushar Kanti Ghosh v. Bina Bhowmick (1953) 57 CWN 378 215
43. Rustom K. Karanjia v. K. M. D. Thackersey, AIR 1970 Bom. 424 224
44. Melepurath Sankunni Ezhuthassan v. Thekittil Geopalankutty Nair
(1986) 1 SCC 118

Part B: Consumer Protection Laws

 vi

(a) Evolution of Consumer Protection Movement, Aim and objectives of the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986

(b) The objectives and reasons for enactment of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019

(c) New dimensions of the CPA, 2019 as compared to the CPA, 1986:

1. Definitions of consumer, service, defect, deficiency, complaint, complainant, goods,

manufacturer, misleading advertisement, restrictive trade practice, unfair contract, unfair trade
practice
2. Three-tier Consumer Dispute Redressal Mechanism and enhancement of pecuniary
jurisdiction. Provisions in the CPA, 2019
3. Establishment of Consumer Protection Councils
4. Establishment of Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA)
5. The inclusion of e-commerce transactions
6. Specific recognition of six rights of consumers
7. Introduction of the concept of product liability
8. Stringent penalties for misleading advertisements
9. Introduction of mediation as an Alternate Dispute Resolution mechanism
10. Remedies for unfair contracts
11. Expansion of the definition of Unfair Trade Practices
(d) Cases:
45 Faqir Chand Gulati v. Uppal Agencies Private Ltd. (2008) 10 SCC 345 232
46. Indian Medical Association v. V. P. Shantha, AIR 1996 SC 550 246
*46A. Medicos Legal Action Group v. Union of India, 2021 SCC OnLine Bom
3696
47. Laxmi Engineering Works v. P.S.G. Industrial Institute, 1995 SCC (3) 583. 256
48. Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta, 1994 SCC (1) 243 267
49. J.J. Merchant v. Srinath Chaturvedi, AIR 2002 SC 2931
*50. Neena Aneja v. Jai Prakash Associates Ltd., (2022) 2 SCC 161

IMPORTANT NOTE:
 vii

1. Topics and cases given above are not exhaustive. The teachers teaching the course shall be
at liberty to add new topics/cases.
2. The students are required to study the legislations as amended up-to-date and consult the
latest editions of books.
 LL.B. I Term

Law of Crimes - I

Cases Selected and Edited By

Ved Kumari
Vandana
Anju Vali Tikoo
AwektaVerma
Vageshwari Deswal
Alok Sharma
Monica Chaudhary
Megh Raj
Krishna Murari Yadav
Apeksha Kumari

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI, DELHI-110007
January, 2023

For private use only in the course of instruction

 Rubric for Theory Exam Papers:

'All the theory papers, except for CLE subjects*, for LL.B. semester exams carry

100 marks each, for which the University of Delhi conducts an end semester

descriptive exam of 3 hours duration. A typical theory question paper contains 8

questions printed both in English and Hindi languages. The student is required

to answer 5 out of 8 questions. Each question carries equal marks, that is 20

marks each. Hence the maximum marks for each paper is 100. A student has to

secure a minimum of 45 marks out of 100 to pass a paper.

Answers may be written either in English or in Hindi but the same medium

should be used throughout the paper.'

***************************************************************
 Course Wise Content Details for LL.B. Programme:
Semester - First
Course Name- Law of Crimes- I: Indian Penal Code
Course Code- LB-CC-104
Credits – 5 Total Classes 60+15
Course Objectives:
The primary objectives of this course are:-
 To familiarise the students with the key concepts regarding crime and criminal
law.
 To expose the students to the range of mental states that constitute mens rea
essential for committing crime and to teach specific offences under the Indian
Penal Code.
 To familiarise the students with the concept of criminal liability and the
vastness of its horizons.
 To keep students abreast of the latest legislative and judicial developments and
changes in the field of criminal law.
Learning Outcomes
1. The students should be able to identify the concept of criminal liability as
distinguished from the civil liability.
2. Identify the elements of crime in given factual situations entailing culpability.
3. Be familiar with the range of Specific Offences (Bodily offences and
Property offences)
Teaching Methodology:
1. Classroom Teaching( Lecturing/Discussions)
2. Class Presentations
Course Content:
Classroom Teaching with help of Legislation and Case Material.

Prescribed legislation:
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Prescribed Books:
1) K.T. Thomas, M.A. Rashid (Rev.), Ratan Lal & Dhiraj Lal’s The Indian
Penal Code, (35th ed., 2017)
2) K.D. Gaur, Criminal Law : Cases and Materials, (8th ed., 2015)
3) R.C. Nigam, Law of Crimes in India (Vol. I) (1965)
4) V.B. Raju, Commentary on Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Vol. I & II) (4th ed.,
1982)
5) K.N.C. Pillai & Shabistan Aquil (Rev.), Essays on the Indian Penal Code
(The Indian Law Institute, 2005)
6) K. I. Vibhute (Rev.), P.S.A. Pillai’s Criminal Law (13th ed., 2017)
7) Syed Shamsul Huda, The Principles of the Law of Crimes in British India
(1902)
8) K.N. Chandrasekharan Pillai, General Principles of Criminal Law (2nd ed.,
2011)

UNITS
Unit 1 : Principle of Mens Rea and Strict Liability 5 Lectures
Common Law principle of actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea and exceptions to
this principle - strict liability offences
Nature of crime
Elements of crime
1. State of Maharashtra v. Mayer Hans George, (1965) 1 SCR 123 1
AIR 1965 SC 722

2. State of M.P. v. Narayan Singh, (1989) 3 SCC 596 22

Unit 2 : (a) Culpable Homicide and Murder 16 Lectures

(Sections 299-302, 304 read with sections 8-11, 21, 32, 33, 39, 52)
Offences of culpable homicide amounting and not amounting to murder
distinguished. Culpable homicide of first degree provided in clause (a), second degree
in clause (b) and third degree in clause (c) of section 299, IPC. Each clause of section
299 contains comparable clauses in section 300. Every murder is culpable homicide
but not vice versa. Culpable homicide is the genus and murder is its species.
Intention - clause (a) of section 299 and clause (1) of section 300
3. Rawalpenta Venkalu v. State of Hyderabad, AIR 1956 SC 171 29

Mens rea and actus reus-Relationship

4. Palani Goundan v. Emperor, 1919 ILR 547 (Mad) 34

5. In re Thavamani, AIR 1943 Mad 571 40

Cause and effect relationship- The act of the accused must be the causal factor or
direct cause of death (read with section 301, IPC)
6. Emperor v. Mushnooru Suryanarayana Murthy 42
(1912) 22 MLJR 333 (Mad.)

Comparison of clause (b) of section 299 with clause (3) of section 300
7. Kapur Singh v. State of PEPSU, AIR 1956 SC 654 57

8. Virsa Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1958 SC 465 55

9. State of Andhra Pradesh v. R. Punnayya, AIR 1977 SC 45 60

Comparison of clause (c) of section 299 with clause (4) of section 300
Distinction between intention and knowledge and role of knowledge in S.300
secondly and then comparison of clause (c) of section 299 with clause (4) of section
300.
10. Emperor v. Mt. Dhirajia, AIR 1940 All. 486 70

11. Gyarsibai v. The State, AIR 1953 M.B. 61 75

Unit 3 : Specific Exceptions to section 300 2 Lectures

General and partial defences distinguished – general defences in Chapter IV, IPC, if
applicable in a given case, negate criminality completely.
Partial defences such as exceptions to section 300 partly reduce the criminality, not
absolving an accused completely. The law, based on sound principle of reason, takes a
 lenient view in respect of murders committed on the spur of the moment. Exceptions I
to V to section 300 are illustrative of partial defences.
(a) Exception I to section 300
12. K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1962 SC 605 79

Reading Katherine O’Donovan,‘Defences for Battered Women Who Kill’,

18 (2) Journal of Law and Society 219 (1991) 88

(b) Exception IV to section 300

13. Ghapoo Yadav v. State of M.P, (2003) 3 SCC 528 96

Unit 4 : Homicide by Rash or Negligent Act not amounting to Culpable

Homicide
2 Lectures
(Section 304A) Distinction between negligence and rashness as forms of mens rea;
mens rea required is criminal negligence (inadvertent negligence) or criminal
rashness (advertent negligence)

14. Cherubin Gregory v. State of Bihar, AIR 1964 SC 205 99

15. S.N. Hussain v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1972 SC 685 102

Unit 5 : General Exceptions -Chapter IV of the Indian Penal Code 5 Lectures

General defences in Chapter IV, IPC, if applicable in a given case, negate criminality
completely.
(a) Private Defence (Sections 96-106, IPC)
The right of private defence has come to be recognized by all civilized societies as a
preventive and protective right where the state protection is not available; this right is
essentially protective and preventive and never punitive. There are limitations on the
exercise of this right both in relation to offences against human body and specific
offences against property. The extent of this right, against whom it can be exercised,
when this right commences and how long it lasts are dealt with elaborately in IPC.
16. State of U.P. v. Ram Swarup (1974) 4 SCC 764 :AIR 1974 SC 1570 106

17. Deo Narain v. State of U.P. (1973) 1 SCC 347: AIR 1973 SC 473 115
 18. Kishan v. State of M.P. (1974) 3 SCC 623 : AIR 1974 SC 244 120

19. James Martin v. State of Kerala (2004) 2 SCC 203 123

Unit 6 : Kidnapping and Abduction (sections 359-363 read with sections 18, 82,
83, 90) 4 Lectures
Ingredients of the offence of kidnapping from lawful guardianship (section 362);
distinction between taking, enticing and allowing a minor to accompany; Kidnapping
from lawful guardianship is a strict liability offence (section 363) and distinction
between ‘Kidnapping’ and ‘Abduction’. Relevance of age, consent, force, deception
and motive.
20. S. Varadarajan v. State of Madras, AIR 1965 SC 942 132

21. Thakorlal D. Vadgama v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1973 SC 2313 138

22. State of Haryana v. Raja Ram, (1973) 1 SCC 544 138 151

Unit 7 : Sexual Offences 8 Lectures

The offence of rape (sections 375, 376, 376A-E read with section 90);Section 377 –
Unnatural Offences ;Comparison to be made with the definitions in The Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
Section 354 (Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty),
section 354A (Sexual harassment), section 354B (Assault or use of criminal force to
woman with intent to disrobe), section 354C (Voyeurism), section 354D (Stalking)
and section 509 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman).
23. Kanwar Pal Singh Gill v. State (Admn., U.T. Chandigarh) 158
through Secy., (2005) 6 SCC 161

24. Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1979 SC 185 162

Reading: An Open Letter to the Chief Justice of India, (1979) 4 SCC (J) 17 169
25. State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh, (1996) 2 SCC 384 175

*26. Independent Thought v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 800.

*27. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry of

Law and Justice, (2018) 10 SCC 1
 Unit 8 : Joint Liability and Group Liability (Section 34, Sections 141, 149
IPC) 6 Lectures
Provisions for providing for group liability in crimes including sections 34 and 149 of
the IPC are exceptions to the general rule of criminal liability that a man should be
held liable for his own criminal acts and not for those of others. These provisions
providing for vicarious liability/group liability are intended to deter people from
committing offences in groups and to spare the prosecution to prove specific actus
reus of each member of the group
28. Suresh v. State of U.P. (2001) 3 SCC 673 191

29. Mizaji v. State of U.P., AIR 1959 SC 572 207

30. Maina Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1976) 2 SCC 827: AIR 1976 215
SC 1084

Unit 9 : Attempt (Sections 511, 307, 309 IPC) 6 Lectures

There are four stages in the commission of crime – (i) intention to commit an
offence, (ii) preparation, (iii) attempt and (iv) forbidden consequence ensuing from
the act of the accused after the stage of preparation is over. An attempt is direct
movement towards the commission of an offence after the preparation is made. An
accused is liable for attempting to commit an offence even if the forbidden
consequence does not ensue for reasons beyond his control and he is to be punished
for creating alarm and scare in the society
31. Asgarali Pradhania v. Emperor, AIR 1933 Cal. 893 224

32. Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar, AIR 1961 SC 1698 231

33. Om Parkash v. State of Punjab, (1962) 2 SCR 254 : AIR 1961 SC 240
1782

34. State of Maharashtra v. Mohd. Yakub, (1980) 3 SCC 57 247

35. Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab, (1996) 2 SCC 648 257

Unit 10 : Offences of Theft, Extortion, Robbery and Dacoity 6 Lectures

(Sections 378, 379, 383, 384, 390 and 391 read with sections 22-25, 27, 29, 30
and 44)
 36. Pyare Lal Bhargava v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1963 SC 1094 272

37. Jadunandan Singh v. Emperor, AIR 1941 Pat. 129 275

38. Sekar v. Arumugham (2000) Cr.L.J. 1552 (Mad.) 278

39. State of Karnataka v. Basavegowda (1997) Cr.L.J. 4386 (Kant.) 282

Unit 11 : Offences of Criminal Misappropriation, Criminal Breach of Trust and

Cheating 4 Lectures
(Sections 403-405, 415-416 and 420 read with sections 29-30)
40. Jaikrishnadas Manohardas Desai v. State of Bombay, 288
AIR 1960 SC 889

41. Mahadeo Prasad v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1954 SC 724 294

42. Akhil Kishore Ram v. Emperor, AIR 1938 Pat. 185 298

43. Shri Bhagwan S.S.V.V. Maharaj v. State of A.P., AIR 1999 SC 303
2332

Teaching Plan

Week 1: to introduce the concept of civil and criminal liability and

to discuss the elements of crime; and to discuss strict liability with
the help of cases.

Week 2: to wind up discussion on elements of crime and start with

the discussion on homicide- lawful and unlawful; constructive
homicide; and the types of homicide- amounting to murder and not
amounting to murder.

Week 3: to discuss the concepts of murder and culpable homicide

with the help of the ingredients of the sections 299 and 300 of the
IPC.

Week 4: to discuss the concepts of murder and culpable homicide

with the help of the ingredients of the sections 299 and 300 of the
IPC- understanding the operation of various sets of corresponding
clauses in sections 299 and 300, IPC. To discuss the relevant
judicial decisions at the appropriate junctures.

Week 5: to discuss the concepts of murder and culpable homicide

with the help of the ingredients of sections 299 and 300 of the IPC
with the help of the established doctrines of transferred malice and
parts of the same transactions along with the cases.

Week 6: to discuss the specific exceptions attached to section 300

IPC and the discussion of section 304-A IPC - causation of death
by rash or negligent act, along with the cases.

Week 7: to discuss the general exceptions in Chapter IV of the IPC

and to discuss the exception of private defence in detail with the
help of the cases.

Week 8: to discuss the offences of kidnapping and abduction along

with the cases while drawing out the main differences between
these crimes.

Week 9: to discuss the sexual offence of rape with the help of the
cases and suggested readings while highlighting the recent
amendments in the IPC. Also to bring out the difference in
approaches of the IPC and POCSO Act.

Week 10: to discuss the sexual offences under secs 354, 377 IPC
and other recently modified/ inserted sections with the help of the
cases and suggested readings while highlighting the recent
amendments in the IPC.

Week 11: to discuss the doctrine of combination of crimes

indicating various types of complicity with crimes and discussing
joint liability under section 34, IPC and the judicial decisions.

Week 12: to further discuss the doctrine of combination of crimes

indicating various types of complicity with crimes and discussing
group liability under sections 141 and 149, IPC and the judicial
decisions.

Week 13: to discuss inchoate liability and the related provisions on

attempt in the IPC- sections 511, 307, 308 and 309 while
describing the tests on attempt and the judicial decisions.

Week 14: to wind up attempts with the discussion on impossible

attempts. To start with the discussion on property offences in the
IPC.

Week 15: to discuss the property offences- theft, extortion,

robbery and dacoity under the IPC and the relevant judicial
decisions.

Week 16: to discuss the property offences- misappropriation,

criminal breach of trust and cheating under the IPC and the
relevant judicial decisions.

Facilitating the achievement of Course Learning Outcomes

Unit Course Learning Teaching and Assessment

No. Outcomes Learning Tasks
Activity
1. Students will learn Class room As given below
about civil and lectures + class
criminal liability; presentations +
mens rea and strict field visit [if
liability. any, scheduled
for the week]
2. Students will learn Class room As given below
about the lectures + class
importance of presentations+
gradation of mens field visit [if
rea and the any, scheduled
differentiation for the week]
between the
offences of culpable
homicide not
amounting to
murder and murder.
3. Students will learn Class room As given below
about the specific lectures + class
exceptions to presentations +
section 300, IPC. field visit [if
any, scheduled
for the week]
4. Students will Class room As given below
further learn about lectures + class
gradation of mens presentations +
rea in criminality, field visit [if
concept of culpable any, scheduled
negligence and for the week]
causation of death
by doing rash or
negligent acts.
5. Students will learn Class room As given below
about general lectures + class
defensces contained presentations +
in the IPC with field visit [if
emphasis on the any, scheduled
right of private for the week]
defence.
6. Students will learn Class room As given below
about the bodily lectures + class
offences of presentations +
Kidnapping and field visit [if
Abduction. any, scheduled
for the week]
7. Students will learn Class room As given below
about various lectures + class
sexual offences presentations +
with major thrust field visit [if
on the offence of any, scheduled
rape. They will also for the week]
learn about the
 sexual offences
penalised by the
recent 2013
Amendment to
Criminal Laws.
8. Students will learn Class room As given below
about the doctrines lectures + class
of Joint Liability presentations +
and Group Liability field visit [if
in Criminal Law. any, scheduled
for the week]
9. Students will learn Class room As given below
about the doctrine lectures + class
of inchoate liability presentations+
and the various field visit [if
tests on attempt. any, scheduled
for the week]
10. Students will learn Class room As given below
about the Property lectures + class
Offences of theft, presentations +
extortion, robbery field visit [if
and dacoity. any, scheduled
for the week]
11. Students will learn Class room As given below
about the Property lectures + class
Offences of presentations+
misappropriation, field visit [if
criminal breach of any, scheduled
trust and cheating. for the week]

IMPORTANT NOTE:
1. The topics, cases and suggested readings given above are not exhaustive. The
Committee of teachers teaching the Course shall be at liberty to revise the
topics/cases/suggested readings.
2. Students are required to study/refer to the legislations as amended from time to
time, and consult the latest editions of books.

*****
 LL.B. I Term

LB – 105: Family Law – I

Cases Selected and Edited by

Usha Tandon
Kiran Gupta
Vandana
Manju Relan
P.B. Pankaja
Pinki Sharma
Neha Aneja

FACULTY OF LAW
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI, DELHI-110007
January, 2023

(For private use only in the course of instruction)

 Semester- First
Course Name- Family Law-I
Course Code- LB-105
Core course: 5 credits; Classes – 64 (4 Classes/week + Tutorial)

Course Objectives:

1. To create awareness and educate the students about rights and duties of members of
family towards each other, with special reference to spousal relationship.
2. To give overview to the students and enhance their understanding on the current laws
on marriage, divorce, maintenance, adoption and guardianship.
3. To give practical exposure to students by field visit of Family Courts, Mediation and
Conciliation Centres etc.

Course Learning Outcomes:

1. Students will be able to practice in Law Courts as a specialized Matrimonial Lawyer.

2. Students will be able to join Research Houses, especially on issues relating to women
and children at domestic and international level.

Unit I: Marriage under Hindu Law

Concept of marriage in general: Nature of Hindu Marriage; Applicability of Legislation

(Section 2 of HMA, 1955); Conditions for the validity of marriage (sections 3 and 5 of HMA,
1955); Solemnisation of marriage with special reference to live in relationship (section 7 of
HMA, 1955 r/w Section 114 Indian Evidence Act); Registration of Marriage (section 8 of
HMA, 1955); Void marriages (sections 11 r/w 17, 18 of HMA, 1955 r/w section 494 and 495
IPC); Voidable marriage (section 12).

Case:

01 Dr. Surajmani Stella Kujur v. Durga Charan Hansdah, 1

AIR 2001 SC 938
02 S. Nagalingam v. Sivagami (2001) 7 SCC 487 4
03 Bhaurao Shankar Lokhande v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1965 SC 1564 8
04 Lily Thomas v. Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 1650 12
05 Pinninti Venkataramana v. State, AIR 1977 AP 43 23
06 Asha Qureshi v. Afaq Qureshi, AIR 2002 MP 263 33
07 Court On Its Own Motion Lajja ... vs State, 2012 (193) DLT 61 37
08 P. v. K., AIR 1982 Bom. 400 56
09 Babui Panmato Kuer v. Ram Agya Singh, AIR 1968 Pat. 190 66
10 Seema v. Ashwani Kumar (2006) 2 SCC 578 70
Unit II: Matrimonial Remedies under Hindu Law

Restitution of Conjugal Rights (Section 9 of HMA, 1955); Judicial Separation [section 10 and
13 (IA) of HMA, 1955]; Divorce [ sections 13(1), (2), 13 (1A), 13 A, 13B of HMA, 1955)
(a) Theories of Divorce (b) Grounds of Divorce with particular emphasis on Cruelty,
Desertion, Option of Puberty, Mutual Consent, Irretrievable Breakdown of Marriage: Seventy-
first Report of Law Commission of India; Marriage Laws Amendment Bill 2013.

Cases:

01. Kailashwati v. Ayudhia Parkash, 1977 C.L.J. 109 (P.& H.) 74

02. Swaraj Garg v. K.M. Garg, AIR 1978 Del. 296 85
03. Saroj Rani v. Sudarshan Kumar, AIR 1984 SC 1562 93
04. N.G. Dastane v. S. Dastane, AIR 1975 SC 1534 100
05. Sanjeev Gupta v Ritu Gupta, 2019 SCC Online All 2255,
(decided on 25 May, 2019)
06. Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, 2007 (3) SCJ 253 120
07. Bipinchandra Jaisinghbai Shah v. Prabhavati, AIR 1957 SC 176 141
08. Dharmendra Kumar v. Usha Kumar, AIR 1977 SC 2213 158
09. T. Srinivasan v. T. Varalakshmi, 1 (1991) DMC 20 (Mad.) 161
10. Hirachand Srinivas Managaonkar v. Sunanda, AIR 2001 SC 1285 168
11. Sureshta Devi v. Om Prakash, 1 (1991) DMC 313 (SC) 174
12. Amardeep Singh v. Harveen Kaur, SC, (decided on 12 Sep, 2017)

Unit III: Maintenance under Hindu Law

The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, sections 24 and 25;The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act,
1956, section 18; The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, section 125; Protection of Women from
Domestic Violence Act 2005.

Cases:
01. Amar Kanta Sen v. Sovana Sen, AIR 1960 Cal. 438 178
02. D.Velusamy v. D.Patchaiammal (2010) 10 SCC 469 181
03. Badshah v. Sou. Urmila Badshah Godse & Anr(2014)1SCC188 188
04. Padmja Sharma v. Ratan Lal Sharma, AIR 2000 SC 1398

Unit IV: Adoption( Read With CARA Guidelines 2017)

The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956

Cases:
01. Brijendra v. State of M.P., AIR 2008 SC 1058 196
 02. In Re: Adoption of Payal at Sharinee Vinay Pathak and his wife Sonika
Sahay Pathak, 2010 (1) Bom CR 434 201
03. Shabnam Hashmi v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. 2014 (2) SCALE529
04 Manju Sharma v.Vipin, 2019 SCC Online Del 8960
(decided on 1 July, 2019)

Unit V: Minority and Guardianship under Hindu Law

The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956

Case:
01. Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India (1999) 2 SCC 228 211

Unit VI: Sources and Schools of Muslim Law

Unit VII: Marriage under Muslim law

Nikah - Solemnisation of Marriage – conditions for validity, classification and types; Dower

Cases:
01 Ms. Ghulam Kubra Bibi v. Mohd. Shafi Mohd. Din, AIR 1940 Pesh. 2 223
02 Chand Patel v. Bismillah Begum, 1 (2008) DMC 588 (SC) 225
03 Saiyid Rashid Ahmad v. Mt. Anisa Khatun, AIR 1932 PC 25 233

Unit VIII: Divorce under Muslim law

Extra-judicial - Talaq, Khula, Mubarat (b) Judicial - The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages
Act, 1939

Cases:
01 Shamim Ara v. State of U.P., 2002 Cr LJ 4726 (SC) 237
02 Masroor Ahmed v. Delhi (NCT) 2008 (103) DRJ 137 (Del.) 242
03 Ghulam Sakina v. Falak Sher Allah Baksh, AIR 1950 Lah. 45 255
04 A. Yousuf Rawther v. Sowramma, AIR 1971 Ker. 261 259
05 Itwari v. Asghari, AIR 1960 All. 684 269
06 Shayara Bano v UOI, SC, decided on 22 August, 2017

Unit IX: Maintenance under Muslim law

Cases:
01. Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) 7 SCC 740 276
 02 Noor Saba Khatoon v. Mohd. Quasim, AIR 1997 SC 3280 291

Suggested Readings:

Prescribed Legislations:
1. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
2. The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956
3. The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956
4. The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939
5. The Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986
6. Prohibition of Child Marriages Act, 2006
7. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

Prescribed Books:

1. Ranganath Misra (Rev.), Mayne’s Treatise on Hindu Law & Usage

2. Satyajeet A. Desai, Mulla’s Principles of Hindu Law
3. Paras Diwan, Law of Marriage and Divorce
4. M. Hidayatulla and Arshad Hidayatulla, Mulla’s Priciples of Mohomedan Law
5. Tahir Mahmood, Fyzee’s Outlines of Muhammedan Law

Teaching Plan:

Week 1: Marriage under Hindu Law

Week 2: Marriage under Hindu Law
Week 3: Marriage under Hindu Law
Week 4: Marriage under Hindu Law
Week 5: Restitution of Conjugal Rights and Judicial Separation under Hindu Law
Week 6: Divorce under Hindu Law
Week 7: Divorce under Hindu Law
Week 8; Maintenance under Hindu Law
Week 9: Maintenance and Adoption under Hindu Law
Week 10: Adoption, Minority and Guardianship under Hindu Law
Week 11: Sources and Schools of Muslim law; Marriage under Muslim law
Week 12: Marriage under Muslim law (Classification of Marriage)
Week 13: Divorce under Muslim law
Week 14: Divorce under Muslim law
Facilitating the achievement of Course Learning Outcomes

Unit Course Learning Outcomes Teaching and Assessment Tasks

No. Learning Activity
1. Marriage under Hindu Law Case Discussion; As given below
Lecture Method and
Moot Court
Methodology
2. Matrimonial Remedies under Case Discussion; As given below
Hindu Law Lecture Method and
Moot Court
Methodology

3. Maintenance under Hindu Case Discussion; As given below

Law Lecture Method and
Moot Court
Methodology
4. Adoption under Hindu Law Case Discussion; As given below
Lecture Method
5. Minority and Guardianship under Case Discussion; As given below
Hindu Law Lecture Method
6. Sources and Schools of Muslim Lecture Method As given below
law
7. Marriage under Muslim la Case Discussion; As given below
Lecture Method
And Moot Court
Methodology
8. Divorce under Muslim Law Case Discussion; As given below
Lecture Method
9. Maintenance under Muslim law Case Discussion; As given below
Lecture Method

IMPORTANT NOTE:

1. The topics, cases and suggested readings given above are not exhaustive. The
Committee of teachers teaching the Course shall be at liberty to revise the
topics/case/suggested readings.
2. Students are required to study/refer to the legislations as amended from time to time,
and consult the latest editions of books.

****
 Rubric for Theory Exam Papers:

'All the theory papers, except for CLE subjects*, for LL.B. semester exams carry 100

marks each, for which the University of Delhi conducts an end semester descriptive

exam of 3 hours duration. A typical theory question paper contains 8 questions

printed both in English and Hindi languages. The student is required to answer 5 out

of 8 questions. Each question carries equal marks, that is 20 marks each. Hence the

maximum marks for each paper is 100. A student has to secure a minimum of 45

marks out of 100 to pass a paper.

Answers may be written either in English or in Hindi but the same medium should be

used throughout the paper.'

*****************************************************************
From

Team Ankitt Sihag

Dear Freshers,
Welcome to the Faculty of Law!
As you begin this new chapter, remember that
the power to shape society and
advocate for justice lies in your hands.
Team Ankitt Sihag is here to support you
every step of the way. Embrace the challenges,
and let's make a difference together!
Best wishes for your journey ahead!

- Team Ankitt Sihag"

Study Material CLC Announcement

For Soft Copy For College Circular

and notices

CONTACT: 8307527080, 9653559299