हिंदी

Legal Principle: ‘ Audi Alteram Partem’ is a Latin Phrase Which Means ‘Hear the Other Side’. It is the Principle that No Person Should Be Judged Without a Fair Hearing. Fact Situation:

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Legal Principle: ‘ Audi alteram partem’ is a Latin phrase which means ‘hear the other side’. It is the principle that no person should be judged without a fair hearing.

Fact Situation: Sanjay, in Delhi, is accused of theft and brought before the Court. The magistrate discovers that Sanjay is mute.

Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?

विकल्प

  • The principle is not applicable to Sanjay since he is mute.

  • The principle is applicable to Sanjay even though he cannot speak since he can be asked to write down his defence.

  • The Magistrate has to take all measures to understand what Sanjay has to convey about the accusation against him.

  • Since it is a Latin principle it is not applicable in India.

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

The Magistrate has to take all measures to understand what Sanjay has to convey about the accusation against him.

shaalaa.com
Law of Torts (Entrance Exams)
  क्या इस प्रश्न या उत्तर में कोई त्रुटि है?
2017-2018 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्न

The Government of India is planning to open Rail Link between Sealdah to Devpura. Devpura is located in –


If a person is enjoying the benefits of a lawful no gratuitous act of another, then he/she:


Mark the best option:
Principle: When the plaintiff by reason of his own conduct contributes to the damage caused by the wrongful conduct of the defendant, he is considered to be guilty of contributory negligence.
Facts: A had to buy groceries from the shop across the road from his house. As A had to leave for a meeting he was in a hurry. He tried to cross the road, all of a sudden, without looking and was hit by B's car. Is A guilty of contributory negligence?


Injuria sine damnum stands for.


Qui facit per alium facit per se stands for


PRINCIPLE Res ipsa loquitur reverses the burden of proof, creating a rebuttable presumption of the guilt of the defendant in situations where the default of the defendant seems apparent.

FACTS X, a truck driver, crashed into Y for no fault of his while trying to save Z, a student who was loitering in school uniform. Based on the facts above, Y inquires the presumption of negligence shall be in favour of


Rules:

A. A person is an employee of another if the mode and the manner in which he or she carries out his work is subject to control and supervision of the latter.
B. An employer is required to provide compensation to his or her employees for any injury caused by an accident arising in the course of employment. The words ‘in the course of the employment’ mean in the course of the work which the employee is contracted to do and which is incidental to it.

Facts:

Messers. Zafar Abidi and Co. (Company) manufactures bidis with the help of persons known as ‘pattadrs’. The pattadars are supplied tobacco and leaves by the Company and are required to roll them into bidis and bring the bidis back to the Company. The pattadars are free to roll the bidis either in the factory or anywhere else they prefer. They are not bound to attend the factory for any fixed number of bidis. The Company verifies whether the bidis adhere to the specified instructions or not pays the pattadars on the basis of the number of bids that are found to be of right quality. Aashish Mathew is one of the pattadars of the Company. He was hit by a car just outside the precinct of the factory while he was heading to have lunch in a nearby food-stall. Aashish Mathew has applied for compensation from the Company.

Select the statement that could be said to be most direct inference from specified facts:


Principle: A person who commits an unlawful act towards another which can be imputed to him, must repair the damage which the other person suffers as a consequence thereof.

Facts: Mr. Rajender Singh was riding his scooter on the right side of the road which is illegal as per the Traffic Rules. Mr. Rajesh Chawla was driving his car in the opposite direction. The two vehicles collided and resulted in loss of Rs. 50,000/- to Mr. Rajender Singh. This includes his medical expenses and damage to the scooter. In this accident, there is no fault on the part of Mr. Rajesh Chawla.


Given below is a statement of legal principle followed by a factual situation. Apply the principle to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.

Principle: An employer is liable for the negligence of his employee. But an employer is not liable for the negligence of his employee, if the victim of such negligence is one of his other employees.

Facts: A and B were working in factory as unskilled labourers. A was carrying a basket of stones on his head. B was sitting on the ground. When A crossed B, all of a sudden a stone fell down from the basket and hit B on his head. B died immediately.


LEGAL PRINCIPLE: 
1. Medical professionals are not immune from liability in tort on the ground of negligence.  
2. Services rendered to a patient by a doctor (except when given free of charge) by way of consultation, diagnosis and treatment fall in the definition of "service" under the Consumer Protection Act, in case of negligence,  the doctors are liable in tort as well as under the  Consumer Protection Act.  

FACTUAL SITUATION: A was the only child of his parents.  Once he had a high fever and his parents called a doctor at home. This doctor used to work at a respectable hospital in  DelhiThe doctor administered certain medicines and asked the nurse to stay with him for the night and administer to him a chloroquine injection. This injection was generally not suitable for young children. The nurse, without a prior test, followed instructions of the doctor and gave the injection. As a result of an allergic reaction, the child died.  The parents sued the nurse and the doctor.  DECISION


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×