English

Principle: One Who Dishonestly Mis­Appropriates Or Converts to His Own Use Or Sells Any Movable Property Belonging to Another, is Guilty of the Offence of Misappropriation.

Advertisements
Advertisements

Question

Principle: One who dishonestly mis­appropriates or converts to his own use or sells any movable property belonging to another, is guilty of the offence of misappropriation.

Facts: 'A' takes property belonging to 'Z' out of Z's possession, in good faith, believing when he takes it, that the property belongs to himself. Subsequently, 'A', on discovering his mistake, without disclosing the actual facts, dishonestly sells the property to a stranger.

Options

  • 'A' is not guilty because when he took the property, he believed in good faith that it belonged to him.

  • 'A' is guilty of an offence of misappropriation.

  • 'A' may be guilty of theft but not for misappropriation.

  • 'A' is not guilty as the property can be recovered from the stranger.

MCQ
Advertisements

Solution

'A' is guilty of an offence of misappropriation.

Explanation:

According to the section 403 of Indian Penal Code defines Dishonest misappropriation of property whoever dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use any movable property, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.  
1. A dishonest misappropriation for a time only is a misappropriation within the meaning of this section.   
2. A person who finds property not in the possession of any other person, and takes such property for the purpose of protecting it for, or of restoring it to, the owner, does not take or misappropriate it dishonestly, and is not guilty of an offence; but he is guilty of the offence above defined, if he appropriates it to his own use, when he knows or has the means of discovering the owner, or before he has used reasonable means to discover and give notice to the owner and has kept the property a  reasonable time to enable the owner to claim it.   
What are reasonable means or what is a reasonable time in such a case, is a question of fact.   
It is not necessary that the finder should know who is the owner of the property, or that any particular person is the owner of it; it is sufficient if, at the time of appropriating it, he does not believe it to be his own property, or in good faith belief that the real owner cannot be found.  
The reasonable conclusion is drawn A is guilty of misappropriation is the correct.

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

RELATED QUESTIONS

Principle: Causing an effect partly by an act and partly by an omission is an offense.  

Facts: A did not provide any food to his daughter D. He also confined D in a room. Consequently, D died. 


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

Principle: Negligence is actionable in law. In simple terms, negligence is the failure to take proper care over something.

Facts: A, a doctor, conducted a hysterectomy sincerely on B and left a small cotton swab inside the abdomen. As a consequence of which B developed some medical problems and had to undergo another surgery. Is A liable?


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

Principle: When a person consented to an act to be done by another, he cannot claim any damages resulting from doing that act, provided the act done is the same for which consent is given.

Facts: 'P' submitted written consent to a surgeon 'S' for undergoing a surgical operation for removal of appendicitis. The surgeon while doing  surgery also removed the gall bladder of 'A':


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


Which of the following is not a reason for the general lack of liability for omissions in English law?


Why is defamation a tort?


Unliquidated damage stands for


PRINCIPLES

I. A master is liable for the wrongful acts of his servant.
II. A person can be called a servant only if there is a relation of employment and he acts under the order and on behalf of his master.

FACTS

X bank launched a saving scheme for poor sections of the society and the customer can deposit ₹10 per day. Y, an unemployed youth, collected money from several customers, and on behalf of them deposited the money at the bank every day. The bank gave to Y a small commission. After some time, Y disappeared without depositing the money given by the customers. The customers bring a suit alleging that the bank is liable. Decide 


PRINCIPLE An owner of land has the right to use the land in any manner he or she desires. The owner of the land also owns the space above and the depths below it.

FACTS Ramesh owns an acre of land on the outskirts of Sullurpeta, Andhra Pradesh. The Government of India launches its satellites into space frequently from Sriharikota, near Sullurpeta. The Government of India does not deny that once the satellite launch has travelled the distance of almost 7000 kilometres it passes over Ramesh's property. Ramesh files a case claiming that the Government of India has violated his property rights by routing its satellite over his property, albeit 7000 kilometers directly above it.

Applying the principle to the case you would decide


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: Interference with another's goods in such a way as to deny the latter's title to the goods amounts to conversion, and thus it is a civil wrong. It is an act intentionally done inconsistent with the owner's right, though the doer may not know of, or intend to challenge, the property or possession of the true owner.

Facts: y or possession of the true owner. Facts: 'R' went to a cycle-stand to park his bicycle. Seeing the stand fully occupied, he removed a few bicycles in order to rearrange a portion of the stand and make some space for his bicycle. He parked his bicycle properly, and put back all the bicycles except the one belonging to 'S', In fact, 'R' was in a hurry, and therefore, he could not put back S's bicycle. Somebody came on the way and took away S's bicycle. The watchman of the stand did not take care of it assuming that the bicycle was not parked inside the stand. 'S' filed a suit against 'R' for conversion. Which of the following derivations is correct?


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×