मराठी

Principle: Everyone Has the Right of Private Defence to Defend His Body and Property by Use of Reasonable Force Unless that Person Had Time to Have Recourse to the Protection of Public Authorities. - Mathematics

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Principle: Everyone has the right of private defense to defend his body and property by use of reasonable force unless that person had time to have recourse to the protection of public authorities.

Facts: X receives information at 5.00 pm that Y along with few friends are planning to burn his crop at midnight which is ready to be harvested. He does not inform the village Police Station which was just one kilometer away. He gathers his family members and directs them to collect some weapons in the form of swords and lathis to protect his field/crop. At around 11.00 pm Y and his aides attack the crop and a severe fight ensues wherein Y is seriously injured. 

पर्याय

  • X is not liable as he was exercising his right of private defence 

  • X and his family are not liable for the injuries caused as they were exercising the right of private defence 

  • X is liable 

  • X and his family is liable as they have not informed the police 

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

X and his family is liable as they have not informed the police

Explanation:

X and his family are liable as they have not informed the police. According to the principle, the right to private defence ceases if the person using this right has the time to take help of the authorities. In this case, the police station is only 1 km away and there is a clear 6 to  7 hours to seek the help of the police.   

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

संबंधित प्रश्‍न

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


Apply the legal principles to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer.
Legal Principle:

  1. 'Misrepresentation' means and includes -the positive assertion, in a manner not warranted by the information of the person making it, of that which is not true, though he believes it to be true; any breach of duty which, without an intent to deceive, gains an advantage of the person committing it, or anyone claiming under him, by misleading another to his prejudice, or to the prejudice of any one claiming under him; causing, however innocently, a party to an agreement, to make a mistake as to the substance of the thing which is the subject of the agreement.
  2. The tort of negligent misstatement is defined as an inaccurate statement made honestly but carelessly usually in the form of advice given by a party with special skill/knowledge to a party that doesn't possess this skill or knowledge.

Factual Situation: The plaintiff, Mr. Madan, entered into a tenancy agreement with the defendant, Esso Petroleum, in respect of a petrol station owned by the latter. During the course of the negotiation of the agreement, 'expert' advisers employed by the defendant had provided an estimate of the sales which the petrol station could expect which was based on inaccurate information and consequently was significantly inflated. The value of the rent on the agreement had been calculated based on this inflated figure. As a result, it was impossible for the plaintiff to operate the petrol station profitably. Whether the plaintiff could have any action for negligent misrepresentation?


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 unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land or some right over, or in connection with it, is a nuisance in law of tort.

Facts: During the scarcity of onions, long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who has a license to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighboring shops. The neighboring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant.
Which one of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?


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 


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


Principle: A Master is liable for the acts of his Servant as long as he can control the working of his servant.

A owned a taxi agency. She had hired B to drive one of her cars. On January 1, 2010, C called up A's taxi agency and asked for a car to drop him from his house to his place of work. On the way, because of the driver's negligence, the car hit a road divider and C was injured. He sued A for damages.


Principle: A Master is liable to third persons for every such wrong of his servant as committed in the course of service. For acts committed beyond the scope of employment, the master is liable only if he has expressly authorised the act.

A owned a bus and he had hired B to drive it and C to be the conductor. One day, when B had stepped out of the bus to have a cup of coffee. C decided to turn the bus around so that it was ready for its next trip. While doing so, C ran over D's leg, causing major injuries to him. D sued A for damages.


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: Nuisance is an unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land or some right over or in connection with it. If the interference is 'direct', the wrong is trespass; whereas, if the interference is 'consequential', it amounts to a nuisance.

Facts: 'A' plants a tree on his land. However, he allows of its branches to project over the land of 'B'. Which of the following derivations 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: An employer is responsible for any accident loss caused to his employees, during the course of employment.

Factual Situation: Ravi Menon runs the "African Circus'.  The circus has a ' night show. Two motorcyclists Rohit and Mohit rotate their motorcycles inside a big iron globe in complete darkness. And the audience, especially the children give a big clap. One day, it so happens that during the one-night show, an accident occurs inside the globe. Rohit and Mohit collide with each other and Rohit loses both his legs. His parents claim compensation from Ravi Menon, the proprietor of the circus. DECISION


Apply the legal principles to the facts given below and select the most appropriate answer:

Legal Principles:
The tort of negligent misstatement is defined as an inaccurate statement made honestly but carelessly usually in the form of advice given by a party with special skill/knowledge to a party that doesn’t possess this skill or knowledge.

Facts: 
X and Y Co. were advertising agents placing contracts on behalf of a client on credit terms, X and Y Co. would be personally liable should the client default. To protect themselves, the X and Y asked their bankers to obtain a credit reference from K and L, the client’s bankers. The reference (given both orally and then in writing) was given gratis and was favorable, but also contained an exclusion clause to the effect that the information was given ‘without responsibility on the part of this Bank or its officials’. X and Y relied upon this reference and subsequently suffered financial loss when the client went into liquidation. X and Y sued K and L Co. for negligence, claiming that the information was given negligently and was misleading. K and L argued there was no duty of care owed regarding the statements. Decide.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×