CUET UG Accountancy Booster Test 1 Judicial Dissolution of Partnership Firm
π Answers are locked once submitted β results and explanations appear at the end.
QUESTION 1 OF 20
Consider the following regarding the insanity of a partner:
I. It results in compulsory dissolution without a court order.
II. It is a ground for dissolution by the court at the suit of a partner.
III. The insane partner cannot file the suit themselves; another partner must do it.
QUESTION 2 OF 20
Partner A suffers a severe accident, leaving them permanently incapable of performing their duties. Partner B wants to dissolve the firm. How can this be executed?
QUESTION 3 OF 20
Match the concepts related to partner misconduct:
| List 1 | List 2 |
|---|---|
| 1. Misconduct Impact | a. Adversely affects business |
| 2. Court's Role | b. May order dissolution |
| 3. Innocent Partner | c. Files the suit |
| 4. Dissolution Type | d. Dissolution by Court |
QUESTION 4 OF 20
Which of the following is conceptually true regarding a partner persistently committing a breach of agreement?
QUESTION 5 OF 20
Assertion (A): Transferring a partner's entire interest to a third party is a valid ground for court-ordered dissolution.
Reason (R): It introduces a stranger to the firm without the consent of other partners, altering the agreed economic relationship.
QUESTION 6 OF 20
When ownership changes due to court-ordered dissolution, how is the realization loss formulaically distributed?
QUESTION 7 OF 20
What specifically states that a firm can be dissolved if its business cannot be carried on except at a loss?
QUESTION 8 OF 20
A firm is dissolved due to business impracticality. Realisation expenses are Rs. 5,000. A partner, X, agreed to bear expenses but the firm paid the actual Rs. 5,000. What amount is debited to X's capital account?
QUESTION 9 OF 20
Arrange the steps when the court dissolves a firm on just and equitable grounds:
1. Transfer of Assets to Realisation Account
2. Court passes dissolution order
3. Payment of firm's debts
4. Settlement of partners' capital accounts
QUESTION 10 OF 20
Which of the following does NOT fall under the court's discretion for dissolution?
QUESTION 11 OF 20
On termination of business, the firm's total assets realized Rs. 2,00,000. Creditors are Rs. 90,000, Bank Overdraft is Rs. 20,000. If Realisation expenses are Rs. 5,000, what is the total cash outflow to external parties and expenses?
QUESTION 12 OF 20
Which equation conceptually represents the settlement difference between firm closure and partnership reconstitution?
QUESTION 13 OF 20
In the context of asset treatment, why are assets sold rather than revalued upon dissolution of a firm?
QUESTION 14 OF 20
Assertion (A): Secured loans have precedence over unsecured loans during liability settlement on dissolution.
Reason (R): Section 48 dictates the exact priority of external liabilities being paid before partner loans and capital.
QUESTION 15 OF 20
In a "no intervention case" (dissolution by agreement/notice):
I. The court appoints a liquidator.
II. Partners can mutually agree to dissolve at any time.
III. In a partnership at will, written notice by one partner suffices.
QUESTION 16 OF 20
The court orders the dissolution of XYZ firm. The firm has an unrecorded liability of Rs. 10,000 which is paid. How is this recorded in the books?
QUESTION 17 OF 20
Arrange the accounting steps when there is continuity in partnership (reconstitution) compared to dissolution:
1. Revaluation of Assets
2. Adjustment of Goodwill
3. Preparation of New Balance Sheet
4. Distribution of Accumulated Profits
QUESTION 18 OF 20
Match the journal entries to the treatments when the firm ends:
| List 1 | List 2 |
|---|---|
| 1. Unrecorded Asset Sold | a. Bank Dr. to Realisation |
| 2. Partner Takes Over Liability | b. Realisation Dr. to Partner's Capital A/c |
| 3. Asset Taken by Partner | c. Partner's Capital A/c Dr. to Realisation |
| 4. Expense Paid by Firm | d. Realisation Dr. to Bank |
QUESTION 19 OF 20
QUESTION 20 OF 20
Test Complete!
Answer Review
1 Consider the following regarding the insanity of a partner:
I. It results in compulsory dissolution without a court order.
II. It is a ground for dissolution by the court at the suit of a partner.
III. The insane partner cannot file the suit themselves; another partner must do it.
Insanity is a court ground for dissolution. Another partner files the suit. It is not automatic compulsory dissolution.
Under the Indian Partnership Act, insanity of a partner is a valid ground for dissolution by the court upon a suit filed by another partner. The dissolution does not occur automatically; court intervention is necessary. Since the insane partner may not be legally competent to file the suit, another partner initiates the legal process. Therefore, statements II and III are correct.
- Option A β Statement I is incorrect because dissolution is not automatic.
- Option B β Statement I remains incorrect.
- Option D β All statements are not correct.
Used: Elimination
Application:
- The key distinction is between compulsory dissolution and court-ordered dissolution.
Final Logic:
- Insanity requires court intervention; hence only II and III are correct.
"Insanity β Court, not automatic."
2 Partner A suffers a severe accident, leaving them permanently incapable of performing their duties. Partner B wants to dissolve the firm. How can this be executed?
Permanent incapacity is a court ground. Dissolution requires legal suit. No automatic dissolution occurs.
Permanent incapacity of a partner is a recognized ground for dissolution by court. Another partner may file a suit requesting dissolution. Since incapacity does not automatically dissolve the firm, court intervention is required.
- Option B β Dissolution is not automatic.
- Option C β Written notice applies to partnership at will.
- Option D β It is not compulsory dissolution.
Used: Direct Concept Recall
Application:
- The question directly tests dissolution by court due to incapacity.
Final Logic:
- Court suit by another partner is legally required.
"Incapacity β Court capacity."
3 Match the concepts related to partner misconduct:
| List 1 | List 2 |
|---|---|
| 1. Misconduct Impact | a. Adversely affects business |
| 2. Court's Role | b. May order dissolution |
| 3. Innocent Partner | c. Files the suit |
| 4. Dissolution Type | d. Dissolution by Court |
Misconduct harms business. Court may order dissolution. Innocent partner files suit. It is dissolution by court.
Correct matching is: 1 β b (Misconduct adversely affects business) 2 β d (Court may order dissolution) 3 β c (Innocent partner files the suit) 4 β a (Dissolution by Court) Thus, Option B correctly matches all concepts.
- Option A β Court role and misconduct impact are mismatched.
- Option C β Dissolution type incorrectly matched.
- Option D β Innocent partner wrongly connected.
Used: Option Grouping
Application:
- Associating legal roles with correct consequences simplifies elimination.
Final Logic:
- Only Option B correctly links all legal concepts.
"Harm β Court β Suit β Dissolution."
4 Which of the following is conceptually true regarding a partner persistently committing a breach of agreement?
Persistent breach harms partnership trust. Court may dissolve the firm. Legal suit is necessary.
Persistent breach of partnership agreement by a partner gives other partners the right to seek dissolution through court. Such misconduct affects smooth functioning and mutual confidence.
- Option A β It is not dissolution by mutual agreement.
- Option B β Breach does not automatically bankrupt the firm.
- Option C β Court dissolution remains possible.
Used: Contextual/Tonal Matching
Application:
- The phrase "persistently committing breach" suggests legal remedy through court.
Final Logic:
- Continuous breach provides court grounds for dissolution.
"Persistent breach = Court reach."
5 Assertion (A): Transferring a partner's entire interest to a third party is a valid ground for court-ordered dissolution.
Reason (R): It introduces a stranger to the firm without the consent of other partners, altering the agreed economic relationship.
Entire transfer changes partnership structure. Third party enters without consent. Court may dissolve the firm.
Transfer of a partner's whole interest to a third party disrupts the agreed relationship among partners and introduces an outsider into the business arrangement. This is a recognized ground for court-ordered dissolution. The reason correctly explains the assertion.
- Option B β Reason directly explains assertion.
- Option C β Reason is true.
- Option D β Assertion is also true.
Used: Contextual/Tonal Matching
Application:
- The reason logically explains how partnership relations are disturbed.
Final Logic:
- Whole-interest transfer legally justifies dissolution.
"Whole transfer changes whole relation."
6 When ownership changes due to court-ordered dissolution, how is the realization loss formulaically distributed?
Realisation loss is borne by partners. Distribution follows profit-sharing ratio. Capital accounts are debited.
Loss on realization is transferred to partners' capital accounts in their profit-sharing ratio.
- Option A β Loss is shared collectively, not individually.
- Option B β Equal ratio is not always applicable.
- Option D β This entry represents realization profit, not loss.
Used: Formula/Entry Recall
Application:
- Understanding realization account treatment directly identifies the correct entry.
Final Logic:
- Loss is debited to partners in profit-sharing ratio.
"Loss β Capital Dr."
7 What specifically states that a firm can be dissolved if its business cannot be carried on except at a loss?
Continuous losses justify court dissolution. Business impracticality is a legal ground. Court may intervene.
The Partnership Act provides that a court may dissolve a firm when business cannot continue except at a loss. This is included under grounds for dissolution by court.
- Option A β Section 48 deals with settlement rules.
- Option C β Mutual agreement is unrelated.
- Option D β Losses alone do not create compulsory dissolution.
Used: Direct Concept Recall
Application:
- The question directly asks the legal category.
Final Logic:
- Continuous loss is a court ground.
"Losses lead to legal losses."
8 A firm is dissolved due to business impracticality. Realisation expenses are Rs. 5,000. A partner, X, agreed to bear expenses but the firm paid the actual Rs. 5,000. What amount is debited to X's capital account?
X agreed to bear realization expenses. Firm initially paid the expenses. Entire amount is recovered from X.
When a partner agrees to bear realization expenses but the firm pays them, the firm recovers the amount from that partner's capital account. Hence Rs. 5,000 is debited to X's capital account.
- Option A β Incorrect partial amount.
- Option B β Incorrect computation.
- Option C β X remains liable.
Used: Formula/Entry Recall
Application:
- The accounting treatment of realization expenses directly determines the answer.
Final Logic:
- Firm-paid expenses recoverable from X equal Rs. 5,000.
"Bearer pays later."
9 Arrange the steps when the court dissolves a firm on just and equitable grounds:
1. Transfer of Assets to Realisation Account
2. Court passes dissolution order
3. Payment of firm's debts
4. Settlement of partners' capital accounts
Court order comes first. Assets are realized. Liabilities are paid. Capital accounts settled finally.
The sequence begins with the court passing the dissolution order. Then assets are transferred to the Realisation Account, debts are paid, and finally partners' capital accounts are settled.
- Option A β Dissolution order must occur before realization.
- Option C β Debts cannot be paid before realization.
- Option D β Court order must come first.
Used: Sequential Logic
Application:
- Following dissolution procedures helps determine correct order.
Final Logic:
- Legal dissolution precedes accounting realization.
"Order β Realise β Pay β Settle."
10 Which of the following does NOT fall under the court's discretion for dissolution?
Fixed-term expiry is automatic. Court discretion applies to legal disputes. Court intervention unnecessary in expiry.
Expiry of a fixed partnership term results in dissolution by contingency and does not require court discretion. The other options are recognized grounds for court-ordered dissolution.
- Option A β Court may dissolve for insanity.
- Option B β Court may dissolve for incapacity.
- Option C β Court may dissolve on equitable grounds.
Used: Odd One Out
Application:
- Only one option represents automatic dissolution rather than court action.
Final Logic:
- Expiry occurs automatically without court involvement.
"Term ends naturally."
11 On termination of business, the firm's total assets realized Rs. 2,00,000. Creditors are Rs. 90,000, Bank Overdraft is Rs. 20,000. If Realisation expenses are Rs. 5,000, what is the total cash outflow to external parties and expenses?
External liabilities include creditors and overdraft. Realisation expenses are also paid. Total outflow = 90,000 + 20,000 + 5,000.
The firm must pay: Creditors = Rs. 90,000 Bank Overdraft = Rs. 20,000 Realisation Expenses = Rs. 5,000 Total cash outflow: 90{,}000 + 20{,}000 + 5{,}000 = 1{,}15{,}000 Therefore, the correct answer is Rs. 1,15,000.
- Option B β Realisation expenses omitted.
- Option C β Only creditors considered.
- Option D β Overdraft and expenses ignored.
Used: Substitution
Application:
- Substituting all external liabilities and expenses into the total payment calculation gives the correct answer.
Final Logic:
- All external claims and expenses must be settled upon dissolution.
"Liabilities + Expenses = Outflow"
12 Which equation conceptually represents the settlement difference between firm closure and partnership reconstitution?
Dissolution requires Realisation Account. Reconstitution uses Revaluation Account. Books continue only in reconstitution.
During dissolution of a firm, books are closed using the Realisation Account because assets are sold and liabilities settled. In reconstitution, business continues, so Revaluation Account is prepared merely to adjust values while books remain open. Hence, Option C is correct.
- Option A β Realisation and Revaluation Accounts are reversed.
- Option B β This is not the conceptual distinction.
- Option D β New Balance Sheet is usually prepared after reconstitution too.
Used: Contextual/Tonal Matching
Application:
- The distinction between closure and continuation identifies the correct accounting treatment.
Final Logic:
- Realisation closes books; Revaluation adjusts continuing books.
"Realise to close, Revalue to continue."
13 In the context of asset treatment, why are assets sold rather than revalued upon dissolution of a firm?
Dissolution ends the firm completely. Assets are converted into cash. Claims must be settled practically.
When a firm dissolves, its existence ends completely. Therefore, assets must be sold and converted into cash so that liabilities can be paid and partner claims settled. Mere revaluation is insufficient because the business is not continuing. Hence, Option D is correct.
- Option A β Revaluation is not legally prohibited.
- Option B β Asset sale is not intended to increase capitals.
- Option C β Dissolution does not necessarily imply a new business.
Used: Elimination
Application:
- Options unrelated to cash settlement can be rejected immediately.
Final Logic:
- Closure of firm requires actual realization of assets.
"End of firm = Cash settlement."
14 Assertion (A): Secured loans have precedence over unsecured loans during liability settlement on dissolution.
Reason (R): Section 48 dictates the exact priority of external liabilities being paid before partner loans and capital.
External liabilities are settled first. Secured claims get priority. Section 48 governs settlement order.
Section 48 of the Partnership Act provides the order for settlement of liabilities during dissolution. External liabilities are paid before partner loans and capital, and secured creditors enjoy priority over unsecured creditors. Thus, both the assertion and reason are true, and the reason correctly explains the assertion.
- Option B β Reason directly explains assertion.
- Option C β Reason is true.
- Option D β Assertion is also true.
Used: Contextual/Tonal Matching
Application:
- The reason clearly describes the legal basis for liability priority.
Final Logic:
- Section 48 establishes liability settlement precedence.
"Secured first, partners later."
15 In a "no intervention case" (dissolution by agreement/notice):
I. The court appoints a liquidator.
II. Partners can mutually agree to dissolve at any time.
III. In a partnership at will, written notice by one partner suffices.
Mutual agreement allows dissolution. Written notice works in partnership at will. Court liquidator is unnecessary.
In dissolution by agreement or notice, partners themselves manage dissolution without court intervention. Mutual agreement can dissolve the firm anytime, and in a partnership at will, written notice by one partner is sufficient. Statement I is incorrect because no court-appointed liquidator is required.
- Option A β Statement I is false.
- Option B β Court liquidator is not involved.
- Option D β All statements are not correct.
Used: Elimination
Application:
- The phrase "no intervention case" eliminates any court-related option.
Final Logic:
- Only statements II and III fit non-court dissolution.
"No court, only consent/notice."
16 The court orders the dissolution of XYZ firm. The firm has an unrecorded liability of Rs. 10,000 which is paid. How is this recorded in the books?
Unrecorded liabilities must be settled. Payment is recorded through Realisation Account. Bank decreases due to payment.
When an unrecorded liability is paid during dissolution, the entry passed is: Realisation Account Dr. βTo Bank Account This records the settlement of liability through the Realisation Account. Therefore, Option B is correct.
- Option A β Realisation Account must be debited, not credited.
- Option C β Liability settlement is not directly adjusted in capital accounts.
- Option D β Unrecorded liabilities must still be paid.
Used: Formula/Entry Recall
Application:
- Understanding dissolution journal entries identifies the correct treatment.
Final Logic:
- Payment of liability decreases bank and increases realization loss.
"Liability paid = Realisation Dr."
17 Arrange the accounting steps when there is continuity in partnership (reconstitution) compared to dissolution:
1. Revaluation of Assets
2. Adjustment of Goodwill
3. Preparation of New Balance Sheet
4. Distribution of Accumulated Profits
Revaluation occurs first. Accumulated profits adjusted. Goodwill adjusted afterward. New Balance Sheet prepared finally.
In partnership reconstitution: 1. Assets and liabilities are revalued. 2. Accumulated profits/losses are distributed. 3. Goodwill adjustments are made. 4. A new Balance Sheet is prepared. Thus, the correct order is 1, 4, 2, 3.
- Option A β Goodwill should precede final Balance Sheet.
- Option B β Revaluation cannot occur after Balance Sheet.
- Option C β Accumulated profits are usually adjusted earlier.
Used: Sequential Logic
Application:
- Following the standard reconstitution process helps determine correct order.
Final Logic:
- Adjustments must precede final Balance Sheet preparation.
"Revalue β Distribute β Goodwill β Balance Sheet."
18 Match the journal entries to the treatments when the firm ends:
| List 1 | List 2 |
|---|---|
| 1. Unrecorded Asset Sold | a. Bank Dr. to Realisation |
| 2. Partner Takes Over Liability | b. Realisation Dr. to Partner's Capital A/c |
| 3. Asset Taken by Partner | c. Partner's Capital A/c Dr. to Realisation |
| 4. Expense Paid by Firm | d. Realisation Dr. to Bank |
Sale of asset increases bank. Liability takeover benefits realization. Asset taken by partner reduces capital. Expenses reduce bank balance.
Correct matching: 1 β b (Bank Dr. to Realisation) 2 β a (Realisation Dr. to Partner's Capital) 3 β c (Partner's Capital Dr. to Realisation) 4 β d (Realisation Dr. to Bank) Thus, Option A is correct.
- Option B β Entries mismatched.
- Option C β Incorrect treatment of asset takeover.
- Option D β Wrong realization treatment.
Used: Option Grouping
Application:
- Associating each accounting event with its standard journal entry simplifies matching.
Final Logic:
- Only Option A correctly matches all entries.
"Sell-bank, Takeover-capital."
19
Revaluation used during reconstitution. Realisation used only in dissolution. Books continue in reconstitution.
When the firm is reconstituted rather than dissolved, books are not closed. In such cases, Revaluation Account is prepared to adjust changes in asset and liability values. Therefore, Option B is correct.
- Option A β Used only in dissolution.
- Option C β Cash Account does not record revaluation.
- Option D β Drawings Account is unrelated.
Used: Elimination
Application:
- The phrase "books are NOT closed" eliminates Realisation Account.
Final Logic:
- Continuing firms use Revaluation Account.
"Continue = Revalue."
20
Cash already exists in liquid form. Fictitious assets are not realizable. Hence they are excluded.
During dissolution, all realizable assets are transferred to the Realisation Account except cash in hand, bank balance, and fictitious assets. Cash is already liquid, while fictitious assets do not have realizable value. Therefore, Option C is correct.
- Option A β Plant and Machinery is transferred for realization.
- Option B β Debtors are realizable assets.
- Option D β Investments are also transferred.
Used: Conceptual Elimination
Application:
- Assets already in cash form or non-realizable are excluded from realization.
Final Logic:
- Only cash and fictitious assets stay outside Realisation Account.
"Cash stays, fictitious fades."
