मराठी

Principle: When a Person Consented to an Act to Be Done by Another, He Cannot Claim Any Damages Resulting from Doing that Act, Provided the Act Done is the Same for Which Consent is Given.

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

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

Principle: When a person consented to an act to be done by another, he cannot claim any damages resulting from doing that act, provided the act done is the same for which consent is given.

Facts: 'P' submitted written consent to a surgeon 'S' for undergoing a surgical operation for removal of appendicitis. The surgeon while doing  surgery also removed the gall bladder of 'A':

पर्याय

  • 'P' is required to pay expenses for surgery for Appendicitis but n ot for Gall Bladder.

  • 'P' is not bound to pay expenses of the surgery

  • 'P' can claim damages from 'S'

  • 'P' cannot claim damages from 'S'

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

'P' can claim damages from 'S'

Explanation:

Written consent for surgery was given by 'P' to surgeon 'S'. The consent was given only for the act of  removal of appendicitis. However, 'S' also removed the gall bladder of 'A' for which no consent was given. This act was therefore carried out without the permission and approval of 'P'. In this case, 'S' acted sans valid consent. There is disobedience to the right of the patient's autonomy. (Ram Bihari Lal v Dr. J. N.  Srivastava. AIR 1985 MP 150).   

shaalaa.com
Law of Torts (Entrance Exams)
  या प्रश्नात किंवा उत्तरात काही त्रुटी आहे का?
2016-2017 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्‍न

Principle: Nothing is an offense if it is done under intoxication and the person committing the offense was incapable to understand the nature of the Act. Intoxication should be without the knowledge or against the will of the person.  

Facts: A, B and C were having a party in Bar where A persuaded B and C to take alcoholic drinks. On the persistent persuasion B and C also consumed alcohol along with A. B and C had never consumed alcohol before. After intoxication, there was some argument between B and C where C pushed B with full force causing serious injury to B. 


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. 


Principle: One who dishonestly mis­appropriates or converts to his own use or sells any movable property belonging to another, is guilty of the offence of misappropriation.

Facts: 'A' takes property belonging to 'Z' out of Z's possession, in good faith, believing when he takes it, that the property belongs to himself. Subsequently, 'A', on discovering his mistake, without disclosing the actual facts, dishonestly sells the property to a stranger.


Development of the law of tort has taken through:


Within the jurisdiction of which High Court does Lakshadweep fall


Aaron is the punter on his high school football team. Biff, one of the players on the opposing team, runs into Aaron as he is punting the ball. Aaron is injured. Biff’s team is penalized 15 yards for roughing the kicker. Which of the following most accurately states the likely outcome if Aaron sues Biff in the tort of battery?


Which one of the following groups are required by law to be insured?


The question contains some basic principles and fact situations in which these basic principles have to be applied. A list of probable decisions and reasons are given.

Principles:

1. A master shall be liable for the fraudulent acts of his servants committed in the course of employment.
2. Whether an act is committed in the course of employment has to be judged in the context of the case.
3. Both master and third parties must exercise reasonable care in this regard.

Facts:

Rama Bhai was an uneducated widow and she opened a'S.B. account with Syndicate Bank with the help of her nephew by name Keshav who was at that time working as a clerk in the Bank. 'Keshav used to deposit the money of Rama Bhai from time to time' and get the entries done in the passbook. After a year or so, Keshav was dismissed from the service by the Bank. Being unaware of this fact, Rama Bhai continued to hand over her savings to him and Keshav misappropriated them. Rama Bhai realized this only when Keshav disappeared from, the scene one day and she sought compensation from the Bank.

Possible Decisions

(a) Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Rama Bhai.
(b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Rama Bhai.
(c) Rama Bhai cannot blame others for her negligence.

Possible Reasons

(i) Keshav was not an employee of the Bank when the fraud" was committed.
(ii) The Bank was not aware of the special arrangement between Rama Bhai and Keshay.
(iii) It is the Bank's duty to take care of vulnerable customers.
(iv) Rama Bhai should have checked about Keshav in her own interest. Your decision with the reason


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: Master/Principal is vicariously liable for the tort committed by a servant/agent, in the performance of his duties as a servant/agent.

Factual situation: The plaintiff a bullion merchant was arrested by the police on a charge of purchasing stolen goods. Some of the gold and silver ornaments were seized for the plaintiff and were kept in the police station custody. The duty constable appropriated the gold ornaments and escaped to a foreign country. The plaintiff after being acquitted brought an action against the State for the compensation. In this case, compensation is DECISION:


Define vicarious liability.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×