मराठी

Principle: Death Caused by a Rash Or Negligent Act of a Person is an Offence. Facts: X Was Driving His Suv Car on a Lonely Road Leading to a Forest at 160 Km per Hour. Suddenly, Someone Appears - Mathematics

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Principle: Death caused by a rash or negligent act of a person is an offence.

Facts: X was driving his SUV car on a lonely road leading to a forest at 160 km per hour. Suddenly, someone appears from the forest on the road and in the resultant accident, the car hits the commuter causing his death. 

पर्याय

  • X is not guilty of an offence as the accident has occurred on a lonely road 

  • X is not guilty because there was no intention to kill the deceased 

  • X is guilty of an offence death by rash or negligent act 

  • X is not guilty because he was also injured in the accident 

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

X is guilty of an offense death by rash or negligent act 

Explanation:

X is guilty of an offence of death by rash or negligent act. The principle states that the death caused by rash or negligent act of a person is an offence. Driving at a  high speed is a rash and negligent act because even if the road is lonely there is a possibility of someone suddenly crossing the road.

shaalaa.com
Law of Torts (Entrance Exams)
  या प्रश्नात किंवा उत्तरात काही त्रुटी आहे का?
2018-2019 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्‍न

Principle: Foreign judgment binds the parties and is conclusive unless it is obtained by fraud.  

Facts: A obtains a judgment from the US court by producing fake documents. 


Principle: Use of criminal force intentionally knowing that it would cause or is likely to cause injury or annoyance to the person against whom force is used, is an offense.

Facts: X, a renowned social worker who had launched a movement for the liberation of women, pull up a Muslim women‘s veil in public in good faith without her consent causing annoyance to her. 


Legal Principle: A person who keeps hazardous substances in his premises, is responsible for the fault if that substance escapes in any manner and causes damage.

Facts: A, an industrialist stored 1000 litres of liquid ammonia in a tank in his premises for his industrial use. There was a leakage from the tank due to which there was ammonia vapour in the surroundings. Many workers in other industries, as well as his own industry and some members from the public, suffered serious health hazards. Examine the liability of A, if any.


What kind of contact must the plaintiff prove as an element of the tort of battery?


Public nuisance include


PRINCIPLES

I. A master is liable for the wrongful acts of his servant.
II. A person can be called a servant only if there is a relation of employment and he acts under the order and on behalf of his master.

FACTS

X bank launched a saving scheme for poor sections of the society and the customer can deposit ₹10 per day. Y, an unemployed youth, collected money from several customers, and on behalf of them deposited the money at the bank every day. The bank gave to Y a small commission. After some time, Y disappeared without depositing the money given by the customers. The customers bring a suit alleging that the bank is liable. Decide 


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 Principles:

1. Joint tort-feasters means joint wrongdoers. People can be joint tortfeasors in case of common action in fact or in law.

2. Joint tort-feasters are jointly and severally liable.

Factual situation: Two dogs belonging to two different owners acting in concert attacked a flock of sheep and injured several sheep. In an action for damages brought against the owners of the dogs. If one of them puts a defene claiming that he was liable for one half only of the damage, then which one of the following statements is legally sustainable in the above case? 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.

Principle: A person has no legal remedy for an injury caused by an act to which he has consented.

Facts: 'R', a cricket enthusiast, purchases a ticket to watch a T20 match organized by the Indian Premier League (IPL). During the match, a ball struck for six hits 'R' on his body and injures him. He sues IPL for compensation for the medical expenses.
Which of the following derivation is correct?


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: Master is liable for the wrongful acts committed by his servant; provided the acts are committed during the course of employment. However, the master is not liable if the wrongful act committed by his servant has no connection, whatsoever, with the servant's contract of employment.

Facts: D' is a driver employed by 'M', who is the owner of a company. During lunchtime, 'D' goes to a closeby tea shop to have a cup of tea. There he ('D') picks up a fight with the tea shop owner ('T'), which resulted in some damage to his shop. 'T' wants to sue' for claiming compensation for the damage caused by the fight. Which of the following derivations is correct?


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×