हिंदी

UG-CLAT entrance exam Question Bank Solutions for Legal Reasoning

Advertisements
[object Object]
[object Object]
विषयों
मुख्य विषय
अध्याय
Advertisements
Advertisements
Legal Reasoning
< prev  381 to 400 of 1023  next > 

PRINCIPLE Nuisance is the interference in the enjoyment of the property.

FACTS Pizzeria, a small cafeteria selling namesake used to run a wood-fired oven. The resulting smoke caused a lot of smoke in the neighbourhood and there were a number of complaints from the locals who had not witnessed such an oven. The food inspector taking cognizance of these reports asked the restaurant to shut down the oven. The owner who had earlier ran a similar establishment in Italy did not comply. Is Pizzeria committing a nuisance?

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE The use of force with the intent to cause harm, or annoy or induce· fear is termed as the Torts of battery.

FACTS A group of construction workers was negligently handling bricks bycatch and throw. Simmons was passing by the site where one such brick fell on Simmons and he brought a case of battery against the contractor under whose employment the workmen were carrying out the construction.

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

Advertisements

PRINCIPLE A master is liable for the acts of his servant, a principal is liable for the acts of the agent, but a hirer of services is not liable for the acts of the independent contractor.

FACTS While implementing the request of Mr. Sampat, the confectioner at Ghantewali and Co. made the oil extra hot to make him a batch of extra crispy banana fritters, the oil sizzled on impact and burnt Dadabhoy who was standing nearby. He wants to know as to whom he should sue

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE A master is liable for the acts of servant done in the course of employment.

FACTS A nurse was deployed for the care of an old invalid suffering a very painful and terminal illness in a hospice. A visiting doctor used to come in every week and prescribe certain medications. In order to alleviate the pain, she used to slip in certain narcotic drugs to the patient with whom she had developed a friendly relationship. The narcotics eventually reacted with the drugs of the doctor's prescription thereby inducing a fatal cardiac arrest in the patient. In a suit brought by the legal heirs of the patient, the suit shall

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE A person is not liable for every harm which comes from the act but is only liable for those harms which can be reasonably foreseen at the time of the injury.

FACTS Sumati, who was being threatened by armed robbery pulled the railway chain. The engine driver recorded the chain pulling but did not stop thinking it to be the work of mischievous passengers wishing to alight before the station. As a result, no help came to Sumati, who was robbed and injured. The suit brought by her was resisted by the railways. As a judge, you would

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE Mere delegation does not transfer authority unless there is an actual transference of the power to control the actions of the servant.

FACTS The Delhi Metro Rail Corporation set-up a link transport service permitting passengers to use buses to the end destinations. These buses and drivers were provided on contract to the Metro Corporation by the Delhi Bus Company and the drivers were trained, supervised and instructed into the routes and manner of driving by employees of the corporation. When a passenger X, had boarded one such bus and was involved in an accident on account of the bus driver; he wants to know against whom should he file the suit under the principle of vicarious liability.

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE Where a dangerous article escapes, the owner shall be strictly liable for the harm which comes without being at fault.

FACTS Bhopal Gas Co. was in the business of manufacturing chemicals that produced a large amount of toxic residue. As per procedure, they used to store the waste in insulated boxes and hand it over to the collecting van of the municipal corporation once a week. After one such collection, the van driver drove negligently resulting in the escape and spilling of the contents of one of the waste barrels. Is Bhopal Gas Co. liable?

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE The Right to private defence entitles you the licence of force in the failure of other options to the extent of harm faced and proportionate resistance likewise.

FACTS X had a snake farm where he used to ·extract venom from the snakes and sell them for medicinal uses. One such neutralised snake entered into Y's property and into his child's nursery. On being tried to be removed the snake got aggravated and was therefore killed by Y's servant. In a suit brought by X against Y.

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE A principal is liable for such acts as committed in the course of an agency but is not liable for such acts as committed outside the course of the agency.

FACTS ABC, a partnership between A, B and C maintained a bank account with XYZ. As per the standing arrangement with the bank, signatures of at least two partners were required for the withdrawal of the money from the partnership account. B forged the signatures of A, which were exactly alike and withdrew a large amount of money and disappeared. In a suit brought by A and C 

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE The test as to whether the act done by an officer or agency of the state is a sovereign function or a function done ordinarily is dependent on the fact that an alternative person may also carry out the latter, but the former may only be carried out by the state.

FACTS In a boundary settlement dispute between India and Bangladesh, a certain territory was exchanged in pursuit of a treaty agreement. X's land which lay in the Indian enclave thus got transferred to Bangladesh, which did not recognise his proprietary rights. In a suit against the Indian Government, the likely outcome is

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE Vis major or an act of God entails a sudden manoeuvre by elements of nature over which we have no control.

FACTS In a bus accident where the driver died of a sudden cardiac arrest, the legal heirs of the deceased brought a suit against the bus company for not making the driver undergo the mandatory health and fitness test before giving employment. The bus company claims a defence of 'vis major'. The defence of vis major in this case shall

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

PRINCIPLE An unlawful action is sufficient to establish an actionable claim under the law of torts and the court need not go into the motivations behind such unlawful action.

FACTS Z, a reporter, had approached A, a famous politician, several times for an interview. Z knew that A was having an affair with his secretary. Frustrated and vengeful, z ran a cover story about the affair disclosing all the information and evidence of the affair. A in tum sued Z for defamation, stating the action was based on vendetta and malice on account of his refusal to give Z an interview. The suit against Z shall

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

When the master is held liable for the wrongful acts of his servant, the liability is

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

LEGAL PRINCIPLE 'Consent' defined as - Two or more persons are said to consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense.

What does 'consent' include?

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

LEGAL PRINCIPLE 'Free consent' defined as - Consent is said to free when it is not caused by

I. coercion as defined in Section 15
II. under influence, as defined in Section 16
III. fraud, as defined in Section 17, or
Iv. misrepresentation, as defined in Section 18
v. mistake, subject to the provisions of Sections 20, 21 and 22 Consent is said to be so caused when it would not have been given but for the existence of such coercion, under the influence, fraud, misrepresentation or mistake. 'Fraud' is defined in which Section?

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

LEGAL PRINCIPLE An occupier is not normally liable to a trespasser except in respect of a wilful act intended to cause him harm or done with reckless disregard.

FACTUAL SITUATION Tony, a Richman, had kept a ferocious dog to guard his house. He strictly instructed all his servants not to go near the dog. Further, a special handler was hired to take care of the dog. Visitors were warned by a prominent warning signboard about this dog.

One day, a 13 years old boy playing in the neighbourhood, running after his ball got into the house. The dog attacked him and kill him, Tony was sued for damages.

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

LEGAL PRINCIPLE A master will be liable for the wrongful acts of his servants in the course of employment.

FACTUAL SITUATION Maria was an old widow who opened an account with the Indian Overseas Bank, whereby she would deposit ₹5 every day in the bank. Stephen was her neighbour, who used to collect the amount and deposit them in the bank. Stephen would get a small commission from the bank for the money deposited. One day, it was discovered that Stephen who had not deposited the money for more than three months had vanished with the amount. Maria filed a suit against the Bank. 

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

Suit and nuisance are

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

Unliquidated damages mean

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined
< prev  381 to 400 of 1023  next > 
Advertisements
Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×