Principle: in Cases Where There is an Infringement of Legal Right Even Without Any Actual Loss Or Damage, the Person Whose Right is Infringed Has a Cause of Action. - Legal Reasoning

Advertisements
Advertisements
MCQ

Principle: In cases where there is an infringement of legal right even without any actual loss or damage, the person whose right is infringed has a cause of action.

Facts: 'P' was wrongfully prevented by the Returning Officer from ex ercising his vote in an assembly election. However, the candidate for whom he wanted to caste his vote won the election. Still, he ('P') brou ght an action claiming damages. Which of the following derivations is correct?

Options

  • 'P' would succeed in his action, as it is mandatory to cast vote.

  • 'P' would not succeed in his action, as the candidate for whom h e wanted to give his vote won the election.

  • 'P' would not succeed in his action, as he did not suffer any loss in that election.

  • 'P' would succeed in his action, as he was wrongfully prevented from exercising his legal right of voting in that election.

Advertisements

Solution

'P' would succeed in his action, as he was wrongfully prevented from exercising his legal right of voting in that election.

Explanation:

The reasonable conclusion is drawn that it is a violation  of a legal right without causing any harm, loss or damage to the plaintiff. Thus it is actionable in tort. Hence P would succeed in his action, as he was wrongfully prevented from his legal right of voting.   

Concept: Law of Torts (Entrance Exams)
  Is there an error in this question or solution?
2015-2016 (May) Set 1

RELATED QUESTIONS

Principle: Acceptance of the proposal must be the exact mirror image of the proposal.

Facts: 'A‘ made a proposal to 'B‘ to sell a chair for Rs. 500. 'B‘ is desirous of buying the said chair for Rs. 400.  


Consists of legal proposition(s)/  principle(s) (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. Such principles may or may not be true in the real and legal sense, yet you have to conclusively assume them to be true for the purposes of this Section. In other words, in answering these questions, you must not rely on any principle except the principles that are given herein below for every question.  
Further, you must not assume any facts other than those stated in the question. The objective of this section is to test your interest in the study of law, research aptitude, and problem-solving ability, even if the 'most reasonable conclusion' arrived at may be absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the objective of this section to test your knowledge of the law.  
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option. 

Principle: Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence. Nothing is an offence which is done in madness.

Facts: A, under the influence of madness, attempts to kill B. B to save his life kills A.  


Principle: The existence of all the alleged facts is relevant whether they occurred at the same time and place or at different times and places.

Facts: A, a citizen of England, is accused of committing the murder of B in India by taking part in a conspiracy hatched in England. 


Principle: A person, who is usually of unsound mind, but occasionally normal, may make a contract when he is not of unsound mind.

Facts: 'A' generally remains in the state of unsound mind and rarely becomes capable of understanding the things.


Mark the best option:
Facts: Manish finds a gold watch lying on the road next to his house. He puts the watch in his pocket and returns home. Has Manish committed theft?
Principle: Whoever, intending to take dishonestly any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent moves that property in order to take it, is said to commit theft.


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

Principle: When a person interferes with peaceful possession of another person without the permission of the person in possession of those premises, commits trespass to land.

Facts: 'T' just walked over the land of 'P' to reach his house as it was a short cut. 'P' had displayed a notice that it is not a thoroughfare. 'P' did not cause any damage to the land.


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

Principle: A person is said to do a thing fraudulently, if he does that thing with intent to defraud, but not otherwise.

Facts: 'A' occasionally hands over his ATM card to 'B' to withdraw money for 'A'. On one occasion 'B' without the knowledge of 'A', uses 'A's ATM card to find out the balance in 'A's account, but does not withdraw any money.


Legal Principle: A product cannot be sold in shops to consumers after its date of expiry.

Fact Situation: Lata, while shopping, notices that the milk packets on the shelves are due for expiry on that day. She objects to this to the shopkeeper, saying that since she was there to buy milk for the next day, keeping the milk on its date of expiry was against the law.

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


India became a member of the United Nations in the Year


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?


Which of the following is not a defense to trespass to the person?


The following is not a tort described as ‘trespass to the person...


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. The claimant must prove that harm would not have occurred 'but for' the negligence of the defendant. The claimant must prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the defendant's breach of duty caused the harm.

Factual Situation: Amar worked for an ironworks, Luxmi Mills & Co. Ltd. operating a remotely controlled crane, Amar galvanized items by dipping them into a large tank of molten metal. In order to protect its crane operators, whose controls were located just a few feet from the tank, Luxmi Mills erected a low wall around the tank and also provided a sheet of corrugated iron that crane operators placed between themselves and the wall. The operators were not facing the tank while operating the crane. Thus, they could not see the operation of the crane and therefore relied upon signals from another worker located farther from the tank. Many other galvanizers at the time situated their operators in enclosed, windowed spaces from which they could safely see and perform their work. Luxmi Mills eventually adopted that practice as well. One day, Amar was working on the crane. At one point, he either turned toward the tank or leaned out to see the worker giving him instructions, thereby placing his head outside the iron sheet. A spray of molten metal burned Amar's lip. When it failed to heal and began to ulcerate, he consulted a doctor who diagnosed the wound as cancerous. Amar ultimately died from the spread of cancer after three years. His widow sued Luxmi Mills for negligence. Whether the employers would be liable for the full extent of the burn and cancer that had developed as a result?


PRINCIPLE Assault is the use of words or gestures inducing a threat of force or danger to the person.

FACTS X and Y being friends were comparing stalwarts of their favourite football teams. X egged Y to go on and without realising it converted into a verbal sling fest and reduced to angry expletives. X and Y decided to file suits of verbal assault against each other.


PRINCIPLE The test as to whether the act done by an officer or agency of the state is a sovereign function or a function done ordinarily is dependent on the fact that an alternative person may also carry out the latter, but the former may only be carried out by the state.

FACTS In a boundary settlement dispute between India and Bangladesh, a certain territory was exchanged in pursuit of a treaty agreement. X's land which lay in the Indian enclave thus got transferred to Bangladesh, which did not recognise his proprietary rights. In a suit against the Indian Government, the likely outcome is


LEGAL PRINCIPLE 'Consent' defined as - Two or more persons are said to consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense.

What does 'consent' include?


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.


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) Consumable goods that are not fit for consumption are not marketable.
(2) A consumer shall not suffer on account of unmarketable goods.
(3) A seller is liable for knowingly selling unmarketable goods.
(4) A manufacturer shall be liable for the quality of his products.

Facts:

Ram bought a Coca Cola bottle from Shama's shop. Back at home, the server opened the bottle and poured the drink into the glasses of Ram and his friend Tom. As Tom started drinking, he felt irritation in his throat. Immediately, Ram and Tom took the sample to test and found nitric acid in the content. Ram filed a suit against Shama, Coca Cola company and the bottler, Kishen and Co.

Suggested Decisions

(a) Ram cannot get compensation
(b) Tom can get compensation
(c) Both Ram and Tom can get compensation

Suggested Reasons

(i) Shama did not know the contents of sealed bottle.
(ii) Ram did not actually suffer though he bought the bottle.
(iii) Tom did not buy the bottle.
(iv) Coca Cola company is responsible since it supplied the concentrate.
(v) Kishen & Co is responsible since it added water, sugar, etc., and sealed the bottle.
(vi) Shama is responsible for selling the defective product. 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.

Principle: Nuisance is an unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land or some right over or in connection with it. If the interference is 'direct', the wrong is trespass; whereas, if the interference is 'consequential', it amounts to a nuisance.

Facts: 'A' plants a tree on his land. However, he allows of its branches to project over the land of 'B'. Which of the following derivations is correct?


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: A statement is defamatory in nature if it is injurious to a person’s reputation and if the statement has been published.

Factual situation: Rudra had been dating a girl named Kiara for three weeks. But he had introduced himself to her as Ricky Thakur (who is one of Rudra’s friends) and he continued to be Ricky for the rest of their relationship. But ultimately the relationship ended badly and Kiara being upset and angry at Rudra started a website named ‘rickythakur-is-a-jerk.com’. She created this website so as to warn other girls about ‘Ricky Thakur’. The real Ricky Thakur files a suit for defamation. Decide. DECISION:


Share
Notifications



      Forgot password?
Use app×