Candidates preparing for Delhi Judicial Services should solve the Delhi Judicial Services Mains 2017 Previous Year Paper and other previous year question papers before they face Prelims and Mains. Additionally, it gives an idea about the syllabus and the way to prepare the subjects by keeping the previous year’s questions in mind. All toppers are mindful and cognizant… Read More »

Candidates preparing for Delhi Judicial Services should solve the Delhi Judicial Services Mains 2017 Previous Year Paper and other previous year question papers before they face Prelims and Mains.

Additionally, it gives an idea about the syllabus and the way to prepare the subjects by keeping the previous year’s questions in mind. All toppers are mindful and cognizant of the types of questions asked by the DJS, to be aware of the various different tricks and types of questions. This should be done by every aspirant when starting their preparation. It is very important to have an overall understanding of the pattern and design of questions.

Only practising the authentic question papers will give you a real feel of the pattern and style of the questions. Here’s Delhi Judicial Services Mains 2017 Previous Year Paper (Civil Law – II).

Delhi Judicial Services Main Written Examination 2017


Time: 3 Hours
Maximum Marks: 200


  1. Please read the questions carefully and answer them as directed.
  2. All questions are compulsory unless specified.
  3. You are allowed 15 minutes time before the examination begins, during which you should read the question paper and, if you wish, highlight and/or make notes on the question paper. However, you are not allowed, under any circumstances, to open the answer sheet and start writing during this time.
  4. Support each of your answers with reasons, relevant legal provisions and legal principles. The length of the answer would not determine in marks.

Question 1

Before you is a petition for review. The review petitioner ‘A’ was one of the defendants in a suit for partition filed by his brother ‘B’. ‘A’ did not come to contest the suit. A preliminary decree defining the shares of the parties was passed on 31.12.2009. thereafter, ‘B’ applied for a final decree for partition by metes & bounds. ‘A’ was pursuing a probate case setting up a Will from his father, the common ancestor of the parties. During the proceedings for the final decree, ‘A’ on 01.12.2010 files the review petition, now under consideration, on the following ground:

“Since the probate case was pending, ‘A’ was advised, there was no gain in contesting the suit for partition and hence he did not contest the suit. Now that he has obtained probate of the Will of his father on 01.09.2009, he has been advised to seek review of the preliminary decree as the shares of the parties as per the Will are quite different from the shares declared by the preliminary decree. The preliminary decree is an error and so the same be reviewed by exercise of the court’s inherent power.”

Along with the review petition ‘A’ also files an application for condoning the delay stating that during the period of December 2009 and December 2010, the remained sick for several months and could not seek legal advise the appropriate time. He also pleads that apart from court’s power for review, he has also invoked the inherent power of the court for which there is no limitation.

B’ on being served with a notice from the Court opposes the prayers for review as well as the prayer for condonation of delay.

Decide: (50 Marks)

  • What is the period of limitation for filing a review petition?
  • Has ‘A’ made out sufficient ground for condoning the delay in filling the review petition?
  • Can the Court consider the review petition in exercise of its inherent power?
  • Assuming that you condone the delay, how will you decide the review petition and on what grounds?

[Note: Probate is a process for proving the validity of Will]

Question 2

On 01.01.2018, the plaintiff files a suit for recovery of Rs. 20,00,000 alleging that on 1.1.2014, he had paid the defendant a sum of Rs. 1,80,00,000 against which the defendant till 1.6.2014 has supplied goods worth Rs. 1,60,00,000 only. The plaintiff also alleges that the defendant acknowledged the dues by writing a letter on 1.1.2016 whereby a fresh period of limitation commenced with effect from 01.01.2016. The defendant admits having written the letter but disputes that it was an acknowledgement of debt. The letter is as under:

“On checking our accounts we find that you did pay us Rs 1,80,00,000 against which we have already delivered goods worth Rs. 1,60,00,000. However, nothing is payable to you since you owe a sum of Rs. 30,00,000 towards the rent of the godown used by you for storing the goods sold to you.”


  • The provisions which the plaintiff can rely upon for seeking extension of the period of limitation? What are the minimum primary mandatory conditions for the application of those provisions?
  • Whether the suit is within limitation? (20 Marks)

Question 3

X’ sues ‘Y’ for partition and possession of the suit property which was owned by their father ‘Z’. ‘Y’ disputes that ‘X’ was a son of ‘Z’ since ‘X’ was born five months after the dissolution of marriage of ‘Z’ and his wife, who was the mother of both the parties.


  • What is the law regarding presumption of legitimacy?
  • On what grounds, the legitimacy of ‘X’ can be challenged?
  • Will you allow an application filed by Y for DNA test to prove that ‘X’ is not the real brother of ‘Y’?
  • Distinguish between ‘may presume’, ‘shall presume’ and ‘conclusive proof’. (40 Marks)

Question 4

The plaintiff has filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 50,000 against the defendant alleging that the defendant had taken a loan from the plaintiff and the principal amount together with interest now comes to Rs. 50,000. While presenting the plaint the plaintiff makes an application praying that simultaneously with the summons, an order of attachment of the defendant’s property, being an urban piece of land, be also issued. For the prayer for attachment, the plaintiff makes the following allegations:

  • The defendant is a man of means
  • He owns a plot of land within the jurisdiction of the court.
  • The plot of land owned by the defendant is the only property from which the amount of the decree, when passed, can be recovered and if the defendant sells away the plot, there will be no means of recovering the decretal amount.


  • Will you allow the application for issuance of an order of attachment?
  • Assuring that you decide to issue an order of attachment. Prepare a draft order.
  • The Court has passed an order of attachment before judgment. Subsequently, the suit is decreed. Before the plaintiff/decree-holder applies for execution, the defendant judgment-debtor sells the attached property. What remedy does the plaintiff/decree-holder have? (30 Marks)

Question 5

Plaintiff ‘K’ sues the defendant ‘M’ for specific performance of an agreement to sell. ‘K’ produces and proves the agreement which is a registered document, saying that ‘M’ having received Rs. 40,000 towards part payment of the suit property has failed and neglected to execute the actual sale deed when ‘K’ offered the balance price, being Rs. 10,000 and requested ‘M’ to execute and register the sale deed ‘M’ does not dispute his signature on the agreement produced by ‘K’.

However, ‘M’ pleads that the document was executed under undue influence as ‘M’ had borrowed money from ‘K’ for the treatment of his father requiring an open heart surgery and being unable to pay back the loan on repeated demands, on the direction of ‘K’, ‘M’ has executed the agreement on the understanding that the agreement would be cancelled when ‘M’ pays the dues under the loan which he is willing to pay now.

Further ‘M’ pleads that the amount still due under the loan agreement was Rs. 9,000 only while the actual value of the suit property was not less than Rs. 70,000. ‘M’ also produces documents of the loan transaction and the demand letters from ‘K’. ‘M’ also pleads that ‘K’ committed fraud by giving him a false assurance that the document would never be acted upon and would be returned to ‘M’.

Decide: (30 Marks)

  • Is the plea of ‘M’ hit by Section 92 of the Indian Evidence Act?
  • Support the court allows the defendant to prove the defence, how are the parties to share the burden of proof?
  • Does an agreement to sell under law require registration?
  • What is the evidentiary value of an unregistered document which by law is required to be registered?

Question 6

Answer each question in about 150 words:— (30 Marks)

  • Distinguish between order, judgment and decree. Does an appeal lie against an order of injunction passed under Order XXXIX Rule 1 CPC?
  • What is meant by the terms ‘interrogatories’, ‘discovery’ and ‘production’? How do these processes help in the adjudication of disputes in civil cases?
  • Distinguish between the concepts of res judicata and the relinquishment of a part of a claim.

  1. Law Library: Notes and Study Material for LLB, LLM, Judiciary and Entrance Exams
  2. Legal Bites Academy – Ultimate Test Prep Destination
Updated On 30 April 2022 5:07 AM GMT
Admin Legal Bites

Admin Legal Bites

Legal Bites Study Materials correspond to what is taught in law schools and what is tested in competitive exams. It pledges to offer a competitive advantage, prepare for tests, and save a lot of money.

Next Story