Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
The question consists of two statements, one labelled as principle and other as Fact. You are to exa.mine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.
PRINCIPLE: Everybody is under a legal obligation to take reasonable care to avoid an act or omission which he can foresee would injure his neighbor. The neighbor for this purpose is any person whom he should have in his mind as likely t0 be affected by his act.
FACT: Krishnan. while driving a car at high speed on a crowded road, knocked down a cyclist. The cyclist died on the spot with a lot of blood spilling around, Lakshmi, a pregnant "NOman passing by, suffered from a nervous shock, leading to abortion. Lakshmi filed a suit against Krishnan claiming damages.
विकल्प
Krishna will be liable. because he owed a duty of reasonable care to everybody on the road including Lakshmi
Krishna will not be liable, because he could not have foreseen Lakshmi suffering from nervous shock as a result of his act.
Krishna will be liable to Lakshmi because he failed to drive carefully
None of the above
Advertisements
उत्तर
Krishna will not be liable, because he could not have foreseen Lakshmi suffering from nervous shock as a result of his act.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
In this Question, problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the question.
Rules
A. The act of using threats to force another person to enter into a contract is called coercion.
B. The act of using influence on another and taking undue advantage of that person is called undue influence.
C. In order to prove coercion, the existence of the use of threat, in any form and manner, is necessary. If coercion is proved, the person who has been so threatened can refuse to abide by the contract.
D. In order to prove undue-influence, there has to be a pre-existing relationship between the parties to a contract. The relationship has to be of such a nature that one is in a position to influence the other. If it is proven that there has been undue influence, the party who has been so influenced need not enforce the contract or perform his obligations under the contract.
Facts
Aadil and Baalu are best friends. Aadil is the son of a multi-millionaire business person, Chulbal who owns Maakhan Pharmaceuticals. Baalu is the son of a bank employee, Dhanraj. One day, Aadil is abducted from his office by Baalu. Chulbul receives a phone call from Dhamaj telling him that if he does not make Baalu the CEO of NIaakhan Pharmaceuticals, Aadil will be killed. Chulbul reluctantly agrees to make the Baalu the CEO. Subsequently, Chulbul and Baalu sign an employment contract. However, as soon as Aadil is released and safely returns home, Chulbul tells Baala that he shall not enforce the employment contract. Baalu and Dhanraj are not sure as to what is to be done next.
As per the rules and the given facts, who coerces whom:
In this Question problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the question. In answering the following question, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than 'those stated in the problem. The aim is to test your ability to properly apply a rule to a given set of facts, even when the result is absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the aim to test any knowledge of law you may already possess.
Rule:
Whoever finds an unattended object can keep it unless the true owner claims that object. This does not affect the property owner's right to the ownership of the property on which the object is found. The right to ownership of a property does not include the right to ownership of unattended objects on that property.
Facts:
Elizabeth is the CEO of a global management services company in Chennai and is on her way to Ranchi to deliver the convocation address at India's leading business school on the outskirts of Ranchi. Flying business class on Dolphin Airlines, she is entitled to use the lounge owned by the airline in Chennai Airport while waiting for her flight. She finds a diamond ear-ring on the floor of the lounge and gives it to the staff of Dolphin Airlines expressly stating that in the event of nobody claiming the ear-ring within six months, she would claim it back. The airline sells the ear-ring after eight months and Elizabeth files a case to recover the value of the ear-ring from the airline when she is informed about its sale. To the original fact scenario, the following fact is added: In the lounge there are numerous signboards which proclaim 'Any unattended item will be confiscated by Dolphin Airlines'. In this case, you would:
Choose the most appropriate option:
'alibi' means a plea by an accused person that he
Choose the most appropriate option:
'obiter dicta' means-
Choose the most appropriate option:
'Audi alteram partem' means
Mark the best option:
Joint heirs to a property are called -
Mark the best option:
Which one is not a qualification for appointment as a High Court Judge?
Mark the best option:
A will or testament –
Mark the best option:
“Legal Tender Money” refers to
Trade mark
