हिंदी

Principle: Nothing is an Offence Which is Done in the Exercise of the Right of Private Defence. Nothing is an Offence Which is Done in Madness.

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Consists of legal proposition(s)/  principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every question.  
Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest in the study of law, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of the law.  
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. 

Principle: Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence. Nothing is an offence which is done in madness.

Facts: A, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill B. B to save his life kills A.  

विकल्प

  • 'A' has not committed an offence because he was mad. 

  • 'B' has committed an offence.  

  • 'B' has not committed any offence.

  • 'A' has committed the offence of attempt to murder. 

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर १

B has not committed any offense 

Explanation:

B has not committed an offence as he acted in private defence. Being mad, or anything done in madness is not an offence.

shaalaa.com

उत्तर २

B has not committed any offense 

Explanation:

B' has not committed any offence. ' A' attempted to kill 'B' and to save one's own life 'B' kills 'A'. 'A' has committed no offence. It is a private defence. (Kamparsare vs Putappa)

shaalaa.com
Law of Torts (Entrance Exams)
  क्या इस प्रश्न या उत्तर में कोई त्रुटि है?
2018-2019 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्न

Principle: One who asserts must prove.

Facts:  A desires a Court to give judgment that B, C, and D shall be punished for a crime which A says B, C, and D have committed. 


The Right to Property was excluded from the Fundamental Rights during the tenure of the Government headed by 


Principle: Consent is a good defence for civil action in tort. But consent must include both knowledge of risk and assumption of risk, i.e, readiness to bear harm.

Facts: A lady passenger was aware that the driver of the cab, in which she opted to travel was little intoxicated. The cab met with an accident and lady got injured.


Mark the best option:
Facts: Manish finds a gold watch lying on the road next to his house. He puts the watch in his pocket and returns home. Has Manish committed theft?
Principle: Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent moves that property in order to take it, is said to commit theft.


The principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option:

Principle: An offer made by one party when accepted by another makes it a contract.

Transactions:
1. P offered to sell his house for Rs. 20 lakhs to R; R told P that he was interested to buy a house for 15 lakhs only.
2. C was looking for a house for not more than 25 lakhs; P informed C that his house was available for 20 lakhs.
3. K wanted to buy some old furniture; L told K that he would sell his furniture for Rs. 10, 000.
4. R advertised to sell his old car for a price of Rs. Three lakhs; S found the advertisement and offered to buy it for Rs. 2 lakhs 50 thousand; R agrees to sell it to S.

Which among the above is actually a contract?


This tort occurs most often in society.


What is the Compensation Act 2006 s 1 has what purpose...


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: Negligence is a breach of duty or a failure of one party to exercise the standard of care required by law, resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. A plaintiff can take civil action against the respondent if the respondent's negligence causes the plaintiff injury or loss of property.

Facts: 'D' went to a cafe and ordered and paid for a tin/can of soft drink. The tin was opaque and therefore, the contents could not be seen from outside. She ('D') consumed some of the contents and then lifted the tin to pour the remainder of the content into a tumbler. The remains of a snail in the decomposed state dropped out of the tin into the tumbler. 'D' later complained of stomach pain and her doctor diagnosed her as having gastroenteritis and being in a state of severe shock. She used the manufacturer of the drink for negligence. Applying the afore-stated principle, which of the following derivations is correct as regards the liability of the manufacturer in the given situation?


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: There is no liability in tort in cases of inevitable accidents.

Factual Situation: A stranger takes lift in truck. The truck later meets with an accident due to brake failure. The stranger suffered grievous physical injuries and nervous shock. He filed a suit to claim compensation from the truck's owner. DECISION


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.

Legal principle: A master shall be liable for the acts of his servants done in the course of employment.

Factual situation: PUL, a public sector undertaking, is operating a number of bus services for its employees in Pune. These buses are quite distinct in their appearance and carry the board “for PUL employees only”. M, a villager from a neighbouring state, was waiting for a regular bus in one of the bus stops in Pune. A bus belonging to PUL happened to stop nearby and a number of people got into the bus. M, without realizing that it was a PUL bus, got into the bus and soon thereafter, the bus met with an accident due to driver’s negligence. M, along with several others, was injured in the accident. M seeks to file a suit against PUL claiming damages. DECISION:


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×