Principle: Master is Liable for the Acts of His Servant Done in the Course of His Duties. Facts: X Hired an Employee Y in His Construction Business. Y Was the Property In-charge Who Received - Legal Reasoning


Principle: Master is liable for the acts of his servant done in the course of his duties.

Facts: X hired an employee Y in his construction business. Y was the property in-charge who received construction material and gave receipts for the material received by him. Z claimed payment for cement supplied to X which was duly received by Y. X denied the payment on the ground that he has only received half of the material and the balance was is utilized by the employee Y.


  • X is liable for the entire amount 

  • X is liable for the part amount only i.e. for payment of the cost of half of the material 

  • X is not liable for the misconduct/embezzlement of his employee 

  • Z can claim the balance payment only from Y 



X is liable for the entire amount 


X is liable for the entire amount because the principle  clearly states “Master is liable for the acts of his servant done in the course of his duties.” Therefore, it is clear that X will have to bear the consequences of Y’s misdeed done while in the employment of X.

Concept: Indian Constitution (Entrance Exams)
  Is there an error in this question or solution?
2018-2019 (May) Set 1


One of the reasons for recusal of a Judge is that litigants/the public might entertain a reasonable apprehension about his impartiality. As Lord Chief Justice Hewart said: "It is not merely of some importance but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done." And therefore, in order to uphold the credibility of the integrity institution, Judge recuses from hearing the case. A Judge of the Supreme Court or the High Court, while assuming Office, takes an oath as prescribed under Schedule III to the Constitution of India, that: "… I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India as by law established, that I will uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India, that I will duly and faithfully and to the best of my ability, knowledge and judgment perform the duties of my office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will and that I will uphold the Constitution and the laws." Called upon to discharge the duties of the Office without fear or favour, affection or ill-will, it is only desirable, if not proper, that a Judge, for any unavoidable reason like some pecuniary interest, affinity or adversity with the parties in the case, direct or indirect interest in the outcome of the litigation, family directly involved in litigation on the same issue elsewhere, the Judge being aware that he or someone in his immediate family has an interest, financial or otherwise that could have a substantial bearing as a consequence of the decision in the litigation, etc., to recuse himself from the adjudication of a particular matter. No doubt, these examples are not exhaustive. The simple question is, whether the adjudication by the Judge concerned, would cause reasonable doubt in the mind of a reasonably informed litigant and the fair-minded public as to his impartiality. Being an institution whose hallmark is transparency, it is only proper that the Judge discharging high and noble duties, at least broadly indicate the reasons for recusing from the case so that the litigants or the well-meaning public may not entertain any misunderstanding. Once the reasons for recusal are indicated, there will not be any room for attributing any motive for the recusal. To put it differently, it is part of his duty to be accountable to the Constitution by upholding it without fear or favour, affection or ill- will. Therefore, I am of the view that it is the constitutional duty, as reflected in one's oath, to be transparent and accountable, and hence, a Judge is required to indicate reasons for his recusal from a particular case.

If a judge reflects a predisposition so strong that it seems he had already made up his mind as to the outcome of the case, will it be according to judicial norms to ask for recusal by the litigants?

Direction: The passage given below is followed by a set of question. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.

For proper functioning of democracy it is essential that citizens are kept informed about news from various parts of the country and even abroad, because only then can they form rational opinions. A citizen surely cannot be expected personally to gather news to enable him or her to form such opinions. Hence, the media play an important role in a democracy and serve as an agency of the people to gather news for them. It is for this reason that freedom of the press has been emphasised in all democratic countries, while it was not permitted in feudal or totalitarian regimes.

In India, the media have played a historical role in providing information to people about social and economic evils. Also, sometimes the media present twisted or distorted news that may contain an element of truth but also an element of untruth.

Recently, Media comments on pending cases, especially on criminal cases where the life or liberty of a citizen is involved, are a delicate issue and should be carefully considered. After all, judges are human beings too, and sometimes it may be difficult for them not to be influenced by such news. This, too, should be avoided because a half-truth can be more dangerous than a total lie. The media should avoid giving any slant to news, and avoid sensationalism and yellow journalism. Only then will they gain the respect of the people and fulfill their true role in a democracy.

The British law is that when a case is sub judice, no comment can be made on it, whereas U.S. law permits such comment. In India we may have to take an intermediate view on this issue: while on the one hand we have a written Constitution that guarantees freedom of speech in Article 19(1)(a) - which the unwritten British Constitution does not - the life and liberty of a citizen is a fundamental right guaranteed by Article 21 and should not lightly be jeopardised. Hence, a balanced view has to be taken on this.

Therefore, the media have a great responsibility also to see that the news they present is accurate and serve the interest of the people. If the media convey false news that may harm the reputation of a person or a section of society, it may do great damage since reputation is a valuable asset for a person. Even if the media subsequently correct a statement, the damage done may be irreparable. Hence, the media should take care to carefully investigate any news item before reporting it.

Article 19(1) (1) talks about freedom of Speech and Expression and Article 21 talks about life and personal liberty of a person and in case of conflict between Article 19 (1)(1) and Article 21, which one will be taken into consideration.

To secure the enrichment of Hindi, the Constitution, among other things, directs the State to give-primary importance to one of the languages included in the VIII Schedule for the purpose of drawing upon it. This language is

Consider the following statements and choose the best option:

1. The Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) is the Chief justice of India.

2. Chief justice Mr. justice H L Dattu is the present Chairman of NALSA

3. The Chairman of the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) is the senior-most Judge (after CJI) of the Supreme Court of I nd1a

4. Hon'ble Mr. Justice T. s. Thakur is the present Chairman of NALSA.

India and Britain recently Signed an "extradition treaty" Extradition means-

Who administers oath of office to the Governor of a State?

Choose the most appropriate option:

Which among the following was described by Dr. B. R. Ambedkar as the "heart and soul of the Constitution of India"?

Choose the most appropriate option:

Which one of the following is not a Directive Principle of State Policy under Part IV of the Constitution of India?

How many languages are there in the Eighth Schedule of the Constitution of India?

Mark the best option:

  1. It is a fundamental right that no citizen shall, on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them, be subject to any disability, liability, restriction or condition with regard to the use of wells, tanks, bathing ghats, roads, and places of public resort maintained wholly or partly out of State funds or dedicated to the use of the general public.
  2. Laws dealing with marriages in a religious community fall outside the scope of fundamental rights.

Facts: Parliament passes a law recognizing a new and increasingly popular religion among the rich and the wealthy, Vaderism.The law reflects the strong beliefs in Vaderism of no public nudity by a married woman and therefore provides that a marriage between two followers of Vaderism may be declared void if the wife is ever found bathing at a public well, tank or bathing ghat. The law is challenged as violative of fundamental rights. Will the challenge succeed?

The constitution is the supreme law of the land. It is protected by

Which of the following act, first time provided for the establishment of the Public Service Commission?

Which of the following amendment added Tenth Schedule to the Constitution?

In 1950, the Constitution of India contains how many classifications of States of Indian Union?

Which of the following commission/Committee was first time set-up for a reorganisation of the state on the linguistic line?

It is compulsory termination of Indian citizenship by Central Government if one

  1. has obtained citizenship by fraud.
  2. has shown disloyalty to the Constitution of India.
  3. has been ordinarily resident out of India for 7 years continuously.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

Which among the following iii the Constitution of India is called Magna Carta?

The minimum number of judges to sit on the constitutional bench or a bench which gives its advisory opinion on a reference by the President must be

Consider the following about Money Bill.

1. It cannot. be introduced in the Council of States.
2. It needs to be certified as such by the President.
3. It can be amended by the Council of States.
4. President has to assent it without delay.
Which of the statements given above are correct?

Legal principles:

1. Everyone has a right to defend their life and property against criminal harm provided it is not possible to approach public authorities and more harm than is necessary has been caused to avert the danger.
2 Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.

Factual situation: The accused found the deceased engaged in sexual, intercourse with his 15-year-old daughter. The accused assaulted the deceased on the head with a spade which resulted in his death. Accused claimed private defence and the prosecution claimed that the sexual intercourse was with the consent of the daughter. Here, decision:


      Forgot password?
Use app×