PRINCIPLE A person is entitled to protect his property by using lawful means.
FACTS Ramlal is growing valuable vegetables and fruits on his farm and he has fenced the farm to prevent the cattle from entering into it. In addition, he has kept a ferocious dog to chase away intruding urchins and catties. Some children were playing in a nearby playground and the ball slipped into the farm. A boy running after the ball came near the fence and shouted for the ball. But when there was no response, he managed to creep into the farm to get the ball. The dog which was surreptitiously waiting attacked the boy and badly mauled him. The boy's parents filed a suit against Ramlal.
Ramlal is not liable, since the fence and the dog are lawful means of protecting the property
Ramlal is not liable for the boy trespassing and getting badly injured in that process
Ramlal is liable since an ordinary barking dog would have sufficed for the purpose
None of the above
Ramlal is not liable since the fence and the dog are lawful means of protecting the property
According to the principle, Ramlal is not liable as Ramlal is entitled to protect his property by using lawful means. Protecting the firm by keeping a ferocious dog is legally permissible.