मराठी

The Railway Authorities Negligently Allowed a Train to Be Overcrowded. in Consequence, a Legitimate Passenger Mr. X Got His Pocket Picked. Choose the Appropriate Answer. - Mathematics

Advertisements
Advertisements

प्रश्न

The railway authorities negligently allowed a train to be overcrowded. In consequence, a legitimate passenger Mr. X got his pocket picked. Choose the appropriate answer.

पर्याय

  • Mr. X can sue the railway authorities for the loss suffered

  • Mr. X ran sue because he had given consent to travel in an overcrowded train

  • Mr. X cannot sue railway authorities because there was no infringement of his legal right and mere fact that the loss was caused does not give rise to a cause of action

  • None of the above

MCQ
Advertisements

उत्तर

Mr. X cannot sue railway authorities because there was no infringement of his legal right and mere fact that the loss was caused does not give rise to a cause of action

shaalaa.com
Law of Torts (Entrance Exams)
  या प्रश्नात किंवा उत्तरात काही त्रुटी आहे का?
2014-2015 (May) Set 1

संबंधित प्रश्‍न

Principles: A servant is one who is employed to do some work for his employer (master). He is engaged under a contract of service. He works directly under the control and directions of his master. · In general, the master is vicariously liable for those torts (wrongful acts) of his servant which are done by the servant in the course of his employment.

Facts: 'M' appointed 'D' exclusively for the purpose of driving his tourist vehicle. 'M' also appointed 'C' exclusively for the purpose of performing the work of a conductor for the tourist vehicle. During one trip, at the end of the journey, 'C', while 'D' was not on the driver's seat, and apparently for the purpose of turning the vehicle in the right direction for the next journey, drove it through the street at high speed, and negligently injured 'P'.


Principle: False imprisonment is a tort (wrong) which means the total restraint of a person's liberty without lawful justification.

Facts: A part of a public road had been closed for spectators of a boat race. 'P' wanted to enter but he was prevented by 'D' and other policemen because he had not paid the admission fee. 'P' was able to enter the enclosure by other means but was unable to go where he wanted to go. The policemen refused access to where he wanted to go but allowed him to remain where he was or to go back. 'P' remained within the enclosure and refused to leave. Subsequently, 'P' sued 'D' for false imprisonment.


Legal Principle: One of the principles of ‘Natural Justice’ states that, “No person shall be a judge in his own cause”.

Facts: A, a driver of B, a Branch Manager of ABC Bank was caught, suspecting theft, in the bank premises. The Bank management instituted an enquiry and made B the enquiry officer.

Which of the following statements is correct?


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


Mark the best option:
Principles: Whoever takes away anything from the land of any person without the person's consent is said to commit theft. A thing so long as it is attached to the earth is not subject to theft, but it becomes capable of being the subject of theft soon as itis severed from the earth.
Facts: Y cuts down a tree standing on the land of X with the intention of dishonestly taking the tree out of X's possession without the consent of X. But Y is yet to take away the tree out of X's possession.
Decide


Defamation means


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


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. When a person unlawfully interferes in the chattel of another person by which the latter is deprived of its use, the former commits the tort of conversion.
2. Nobody shall enrich himself at other's expense,

Facts:

A patient suffering from stomach ailment approached. a teaching hospital. He was diagnosed as suffering from appendicitis and his appendix was removed. He became alright. The hospital however found some unique cells in the appendix and using the cell lines thereof, it developed drugs of enormous commercial value. When the erstwhile patient came to know about it, he claimed a share in the profit made by the hospital.

Possible Decisions

(a) The hospital need not share its profits with the patient.
(b) The hospital may share its profits on ex gratis basis. (c) The hospital shall share its profits with the patient.

Possible Reasons

(i) The patient, far from being deprived of the use of his appendix, actually benefitted by its removal.
(ii) The hospital instead of throwing away the appendix conducted further research on it on its own and the development of the drug was the result of its own effort.
(iii) The hospital could not have achieved its success without that appendix belonging to the patient.
(iv) Everybody must care for and share with others. 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: 
1. An act done by the consent of a person above 18  years is not an offense; provide the offender did not intend to cause death or grievous hurt.  
2. Mere pecuniary benefit is not a thing done for a  person's benefit'.

FACTUAL SITUATION: A, a poor man, is in dire need of money to pay off his money lenders. An approaches Z, a  doctor, to operate on him to remove one of his kidneys so that he can donate it to needy people and earn money. The doctor explains to him the risks and thereafter proceeds to remove his kidney. In the process, some complication develops and A develops an abdominal tumor. Is Z guilty? DECISION


Define vicarious liability.


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×