English

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

Advertisements
Advertisements

Question

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.

Options

  • A has not committed any offence since he does not cause any specific injury to any specific person 

  • A has not committed any offence because he does not gain any advantage from persons living in the vicinity 

  • A has committed a public nuisance 

  • A has not committed any offence because the alleged acts are done on the fields owned and used by him and acts are done without any intention to cause harm. 

MCQ
Advertisements

Solution

A has committed a public nuisance 

Explanation:

A has committed public nuisance as defined in the principle. According to the principle: “Doing of an act which  causes common injury, danger or annoyance to public  or which is likely to cause such injury or annoyance is  Public nuisance.” X’s action of burning crop stubbles is a public nuisance because smoke caused by his action is disturbing to the public. The principle also states  that “A common nuisance is not excused because it  causes some nuisance or advantage.” This may be interpreted to mean that X’s action cannot be excused even if it is advantageous to his farm.   

shaalaa.com
Law of Torts (Entrance Exams)
  Is there an error in this question or solution?
2018-2019 (May) Set 1

RELATED QUESTIONS

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

Principle: When a person falsifies something with the intent to deceive another person or entity is forgery and is a criminal act. Changing or adding the signature on a document, deleting it, using or possessing false writing is also considered forgery. In the case of writing to fall under the definition, the material included must have been fabricated or altered significantly in order to represent something it is actually not.

Facts: John was a publisher of ancient books and papers. In one of his books on the World Wars, he gave photograph of some letters written by famous historic personalities. A researcher in history noted that in the pictures of some of the letters printed in the book, John had added some words or sentences in his own handwriting to give completeness to the sentences, so that the readers will get a clear picture of the writer’s intention. The researcher challenges the originality of those pictures and claims that the book containing the forged letters should be banned. Examine the validity of the researcher’s demand.


The law relating to prisoners of war has been codified by


When goods are displayed in a shop with a price tag, it is


Mark the best option:
Principles:

  1. Whoever threatens another with any injury to his person, reputation or property, or to the person or reputation of anyone in whom that person is interested, with intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding the execution of such threats, commits criminal intimidation.
  2. A threat to injure the reputation of any deceased person in whom the person threatened is interesting, is covered within the above provision.

Facts: Monty is a tenant in the Sharmas' house, living on the top floor while the Sharmas occupy the ground floor. However, he is always irregular in paying the rent. The Sharmas' are tired of asking him to pay on time and his manners have deteriorated over time. What started as mere excuses snowballed into name-calling, until one day, Monty threatened to come with his friends and vandalize the Sharmas' house, if they complained or took action against him.
Post the threat issued by Monty, the Sharmas' called the welfare officer of their residential colony, Budhdeb to discuss the matter with him. Monty threatened Budhdeb saying that he would expose his deceased father's illegal activities and release his personal numbers etc. on the internet to trouble Budhdeb.
Against whom is Monty guilty of criminal intimidation?


Injuria sine damnum stands for.


LEGAL PRINCIPLE A master will be liable for the wrongful acts of his servants in the course of employment.

FACTUAL SITUATION Maria was an old widow who opened an account with the Indian Overseas Bank, whereby she would deposit ₹5 every day in the bank. Stephen was her neighbour, who used to collect the amount and deposit them in the bank. Stephen would get a small commission from the bank for the money deposited. One day, it was discovered that Stephen who had not deposited the money for more than three months had vanished with the amount. Maria filed a suit against the Bank. 


Which follow from the application of the undermentioned legal principle:

Legal Principle: The occupier of premises owes a duty of care to all his invitees and visitors.

Factual Situation:
Devi who was the owner of a big home with a compound wall, constructed an underground tank to store water. This was covered by jute bags since the work was incomplete. The postman who came inside to deliver registered letter fell into this tank and hurt himself. There was also a box on the outside of the compound wall, where all the mail could be deposited. The injured man filed a suit against Devi claiming compensation.


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.


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: A gave some cash and cheques to his friend B, who was an employee of the State Bank of India, to deposit the same in that Bank in the account of A. B misappropriated the amount. If A sues the Bank for damages, then the Bank is DECISION:


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: In a civil action for defamation, the truth of the defamatory matter is an absolute defense. However, the burden of proving truth is on the defendant; and he is liable if he does not successfully discharge this burden.

Facts: 'D' who was the editor of a local weekly, published a series of articles mentioning that 'P', who was a government servant, issued false certificates, accepted bribe, adopted corrupt and illegal means to mint money and was a 'mischief monger'. 'P' brought a civil action against 'D', who could not prove the facts published by him.
Under the circumstances, which of the following derivations is correct?


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×