Question:

Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as 'Assertion' (A) and the other as 'Reason' (R). Examine these two statements carefully and select the correct answer.

Assertion (A): A void contract is not necessarily illegal.

Reason (R): Every illegal contract is void.

Show Hint

Both statements are correct. Ask whether "every illegal agreement is void" can by itself prove that some void agreements are perfectly lawful. It cannot, because that is the reverse direction.
Updated On: Jul 17, 2026
  • Both A and R are individually true and R is the correct explanation of A.
  • Both A and R are individually true but R is not the correct explanation of A.
  • A is true but R is false.
  • A is false but R is true.
Show Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
An assertion and reason question needs three separate checks. Is A true on its own? Is R true on its own? If both are true, does R actually explain why A is true?
The subject here is the relationship between void agreements and illegal agreements.

Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
A void agreement is one the law will not enforce. An illegal agreement is one whose object or consideration is forbidden by law, or is fraudulent, immoral or against public policy.
Illegality is the narrower idea. Every illegal agreement is void, but voidness has many other causes that have nothing to do with illegality.

Step 3: Testing statement A:
A says a void contract is not necessarily illegal. This is true.
An agreement with a minor is void, but nothing about it is illegal. An agreement that is uncertain in meaning is void, but it breaks no law. An agreement made under a shared mistake of fact is void, yet it is perfectly innocent.
So voidness does not carry illegality with it. A is true.

Step 4: Testing statement R:
R says every illegal contract is void. This is also true. Once the object or consideration of an agreement is unlawful, the agreement is void and the courts will not touch it. Illegality also taints any collateral transaction, which is a further consequence that voidness alone does not have. R is true.

Step 5: Does R explain A?
R states that illegal implies void. A states that void does not imply illegal.
The second is the converse question. Knowing that every illegal agreement is void tells you nothing about the many void agreements that were never illegal in the first place.
To prove A you need examples of void but lawful agreements, such as an agreement with a minor. R supplies none of that. So R does not explain A, although the two sit in the same area of law.

Step 6: Why the other options fail:
Option (A) claims R explains A, which fails for the reason just given.
Option (C) calls R false, but every illegal agreement really is void.
Option (D) calls A false, but plenty of void agreements are lawful.

Step 7: Final Answer:
Both statements are true, but the reason is about illegal agreements being void and does not prove that void agreements can be lawful.
\[ \boxed{\text{Option (B)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top CLAT Legal Studies Questions

View More Questions

Top CLAT Contract Law Questions

View More Questions

Top CLAT Questions

View More Questions