Question
In which case it was held that the “goods on a
display are an invitation, not an offer?Solution
It was observed by the Court that the “goods on a display are an invitation, not an offer” and thus, the Court held that display of goods along with price tags merely amounts to invitation to treat and therefore, if an intending buyer is willing to purchase the goods at a price mentioned on the tag, he makes an offer to buy the goods. Thus, the shopkeeper has the right to accept or reject the same. The contract would arise only when the offer is accepted. Powell v. Lee- an acceptance is treated as valid; it is necessary that the same must be communicated to the offeror either by the offeree or by some duly authorized person on his behalf. Harvey v. Facey - Mere reply of a query is not an acceptance. Felthouse v. Bindley- acceptance should be communicated and such communication should be made to the offeror.
Which approach to liquidity monitoring involves predefined internal limits for ratios like "commercial papers to total assets"?
Under LEF for an NBFC-UL (other than IFC), what is the absolute maximum limit for exposure to a "Single Counterparty"?
Effective from March 31, 2026, the NPA classification norm for all categories of NBFCs will be an overdue period of:
Housing loans extended at "teaser rates" by an NBFC-UL require a provision of:
For "Loss Assets," if they are permitted to remain on the books, what provision is required?
What is the standard asset additional provisioning rate for an NBFC-Middle Layer (NBFC-ML)?
Which of the following assets qualifies as HQLA with a 0% haircut?
What general provision is required for "Sub-standard assets"?
For an NBFC in the Upper Layer (NBFC-UL), what is the minimum Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital requirement?
Banks can provide Finance to certain NBFCs as per the restrictions provided by RBI, So according to those regulations Banks’ exposures to a single NB...
Relevant for Exams:
