मराठी

Principle: Whoever Causes Death by Rash Or Negligent Act Commits an Offence. Facts: X is Having a House on the Roadside Which is Also Having a Street on the Back of the House. He Has a Lawn

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

Principle: Whoever causes death by rash or negligent act commits an offence.

Facts: X is having a house on the roadside which is also having a street on the back of the house. He has a lawn on the back of his house where he has built a toilet.  To prevent the intruders from entering his house, he got the fence charged with a high voltage live electric wire. Z was passing through the street at the backyard of the house of X and sat down to take rest near the fence. While getting up, his hands came in contact with the fence which was connected to high voltage electric wire causing his death. 

पर्याय

  • X has not committed any offence because he has the right to prevent trespass

  • X has committed an offence of causing death by rash and negligent act 

  • X has committed no offence because he does not have any enmity with X 

  • X has committed an offence of Murder 

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

X has committed an offense of causing death by rash and negligent act 

Explanation:

has committed an offense of causing death by rash and negligent act. The act of fencing a private house with high voltage electric wires is a rash and negligent act because there is a danger of someone accidentally  touching it.   

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

संबंधित प्रश्‍न

Principle: Damages the money recompense, as far as money can do, for the loss suffered by a person.

Facts: A, an Indian citizen, have a right to vote, was not allowed to cast his vote on the polling booth, by the returning officer. The name of A was mentioned in the voter‘s list. A has also reported at the polling booth in time. However, the candidate in whose favor A would have cast his vote won the election. A filed a suit claiming damages. 


Principle: Doing of an act which causes common injury, danger or annoyance to the public or which is likely to cause such injury or annoyance is Public nuisance. A common nuisance is not excused because it causes some nuisance or advantage.

Facts: 'A‘ a farmer having large farmlands burns crop residue (stubble) on his fields after harvesting the crop to make the field ready for next crop as this is the easy, fast and convenient method of making the field ready for next crop. His farmlands are adjoining a densely inhabited residential area and people pass through the smoke while traveling on the road adjoining his farmlands. The smoke caused by fire also enters the houses in the colony.


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 is liable to compensate others for harm caused by the escape of any inherently dangerous material that he keeps on his land.

Fact Situation: Ankit lights a bonfire in his courtyard to warm himself up during a cold winter evening. A strong wind suddenly blows some sparks from the fire, on to his neighbour’s house which catches fire and gets completely destroyed.

Which of the following statements is the most appropriate in relation to the legal principle stated above?


What the Injuries Board is...


Torts is a ________


Which follow from the application of the undermentioned legal principle:

Legal Principle: Even if the sovereign functions of the State are discharged negligently the State is not vicariously liable in tort.

Factual Situation:
A’ was a trader in gold. There he was arrested by Police and was detained in the police lock-up after search. The gold with him along with sundry other things was seized. Later he was discharged. His possessions seized by the police were returned, except the gold. HE moved against the State in tort. In the words of the Supreme Court, “There can be no escape from the conclusion that the Police Officers were negligent in dealing with the property after it was seized.” One of the Constables was a Muslim. He fled with gold to Pakistan.


Principle: Injuria Sine Damnum i.e. Injury (violation of legal right) without damage

Facts: X, who was the returning officer at a polling booth in Amethi, wrongly refused to register a duly tendered vote of Y in the recent UP elections, even though Y was an eligible voter. The candidate in whose favour Y wanted to vote, was declared elected. Give the appropriate answer-


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:

Defamation means publication of a false and derogatory statement about another person without lawful justification.

Factual situation: A writes a defamatory letter to B containing defamatory remarks in reference of B in Urdu language. A is aware that B does not know Urdu. B goes C who knows Urdu and the letter is read over by C to him. B sues A for defamation. DECISION:


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

Legal Principles:
1. The Tort of Negligence is a legal wrong that is suffered by someone at the hands of another who fails to take proper care to avoid what a reasonable person would regard as a foreseeable risk.
2. The test of liability requires that the harm must be a reasonably foreseeable result of the defendant’s conduct, a relationship of proximity must exist and it must be fair, just and reasonable to impose liability.
3. Volenti non-fit injuria is a defense to action in negligence.

Facts:
A team of scientists imported a virus for the purpose of research. They carried out research on their premises into foot and mouth disease in cattle, and they were apparently responsible for the escape of some virus. As a result, there was an outbreak of foot and mouth disease in the area, and the Minister of Agriculture ordered two markets to be closed. This caused some of the traders, who were two firms of auctioneers, to suffer a loss of profits on a total of six market days, from which they sought to recover. Decide whether the scientists owed a duty of care towards the traders?


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×