English

AILET entrance exam Question Bank Solutions

Advertisements
[object Object]
[object Object]
Subjects
Popular subjects
Topics

Please select a subject first

Advertisements
Advertisements
< prev  3281 to 3300 of 5721  next > 

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 Principles: In a suit for malicious prosecution, the plaintiff must prove the following essentials:

1. That he was prosecuted by the defendant.
2. That the proceeding complained was terminated in favour of the present plaintiff.
3. That the prosecution was instituted against him without any just or reasonable cause.
4. That the prosecution was instituted with a malicious intention, that is, not with the mere intention of getting the law into effect, but with an intention, which was wrongful in fact.
5. That he suffered damage to his reputation or to the safety of person, or to the security of his property.

Factual situation: A recovered a large sum of money from Railway Co. for personal injuries. Subsequently, Railway Co. came to know that injuries were not real and were created by doctor B. Railway Co, prosecuted B for playing fraud on the company, but B was acquitted. B sued Railway Co. for malicious prosecution. In the light of these facts which of the following statements is true? DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

Principle: Where there is a transfer of ownership of one thing for the ownership of some other thing it is called an exchange, while the transfer of ownership for consideration of money is called a sale, whereas without consideration it becomes a gift.

Facts: 'A' transfers his house worth `50 lakh to 'B' for a shopping building worth the same amount, as consideration from 'B'.

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

Advertisements

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: Whoever, unlawfully or negligently does any act which is, and which he knows or has reason to believe to he, likely to spread the infection of any disease dangerous to life, shall be guilty of a negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life.

Facts: 'K', a person, knowing that he is suffering from Cholera, travels by a train without informing the railway officers of his condition.

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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: The occupier of a premise owes a duty of care to all his invitees and visitor.

Factual Situation: Radhika's brother, Akash, had come to visit at her place. After seeing her wealth. Akash decided to commit theft that night. While he was trying to escape that night he gets electrocuted by the wires which were fixed on the boundary walls. Akash plans to sue Radhika. Will his claim succeed? DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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:
1. An unlawful intrusion that interferes with one's person or property constitutes trespass.
2. An easement is the right to use another person's land for a stated purpose and has been in use for quite some time. It can involve a general or specific portion of the property.

Factual Situation: Vijay wanted to construct a shed on his window to stop the water from leaking to his house. The shed was constructed but it protruded in Namit's house. Vijay claims it is his elementary right. Will Vijay's claim succeed? DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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
1. No-fault liability means the liability of a person even without any negligent act on his part and even if he has taken due care and caution. 
2. If a person brings and keeps any dangerous thing on his land, then he is liable for any damage caused if the thing escapes. 
3. No one can be penalized for an Act of God which is unforeseeable and unpredictable. 

Factual Situation: B Owned and managed a company supplying electricity to the nearby locality. On a particular windy and stormy day, one of the wires snapped and was hanging down A, a cyclist who was driving in the night,  saw the wire from a distance. There was a nearby street light with low visibility. He came in contact with the wire and was electrocuted immediately. His heirs sued A on the ground of strict liability. Decide. DECISION:  

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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: The master/principal is liable for all acts done by his duly appointed servant/agent for all acts done by him lawfully in the course of his employment. 

Factual Situation: A had an agency that used to lend carpenters to people on need basis. A deputed B to do some repair work in C's shed. While so doing, B lit up a  cigarette and threw it as soon as he saw someone coming there. The cigarette remaining lit caused a fire and she was reduced to ashes. C sued A and B. Decide. DECISION: 

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: 
1. Medical professionals are not immune from liability in tort on the ground of negligence.  
2. Services rendered to a patient by a doctor (except when given free of charge) by way of consultation, diagnosis and treatment fall in the definition of "service" under the Consumer Protection Act, in case of negligence,  the doctors are liable in tort as well as under the  Consumer Protection Act.  

FACTUAL SITUATION: A was the only child of his parents.  Once he had a high fever and his parents called a doctor at home. This doctor used to work at a respectable hospital in  DelhiThe doctor administered certain medicines and asked the nurse to stay with him for the night and administer to him a chloroquine injection. This injection was generally not suitable for young children. The nurse, without a prior test, followed instructions of the doctor and gave the injection. As a result of an allergic reaction, the child died.  The parents sued the nurse and the doctor.  DECISION

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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: 
1. An act done by the consent of a person above 18  years is not an offense; provide the offender did not intend to cause death or grievous hurt.  
2. Mere pecuniary benefit is not a thing done for a  person's benefit'.

FACTUAL SITUATION: A, a poor man, is in dire need of money to pay off his money lenders. An approaches Z, a  doctor, to operate on him to remove one of his kidneys so that he can donate it to needy people and earn money. The doctor explains to him the risks and thereafter proceeds to remove his kidney. In the process, some complication develops and A develops an abdominal tumor. Is Z guilty? DECISION

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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: 
1. An act done by the consent of a person above 18  years is not an offense; provide the offender did not intend to cause death or grievous hurt.  
2. Mere pecuniary benefit is not a thing done for a  person's benefit'.

FACTUAL SITUATION: A is in a house which is on fire,  with Z, a child. People below hold out a blanket. A drops the child from the housetop, knowing it to be likely that the fall may kill the child but intending to save him from the fire.  Unfortunately, the child is killed is guilty? DECISION

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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: Whoever stores a substance that could cause damage to escape shall be absolutely liable (i.e. liable even when he has exercised necessary care) for any damage caused by the escape of the substance.

Factual situation: Union Carbide India Limited (UCIL) manufactured methyl isocyanate, an extremely toxic gas. Due to a storm, the gas that was being stored in sealed containers got released. Before much could happen, the local municipal authorities managed to contain the disaster. The authorities filed a suit against UCIL for the costs that were incurred in decontamination. However, later it was realized that the clean-up by the authorities could have been done without spending as many resources and the damage was not that significant. UCIL argued that it would pay only part of the amount demanded by the authorities, which could have dealt with the contamination. DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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 partner is liable for the debts incurred by the other partners in the course of the partnership.

Factual situation: Satwik and Prateek enter into a partnership to produce a film, wherein Satwik also directs the movie. The movie bombed at the box office. Consequently, they run into financial difficulties and the partnership ends. Prateek goes to Abbas to borrow some money, which Abbas understands is for repaying the debts from the partnership. Prateek takes the money and absconds to Malibu. Abbas sues Satwik for the amount. Decide. DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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: Everybody is under a legal obligation to take reasonable care to avoid act or omission which he can foresee would injure his neighbor, the neighbour for this purpose is any person whom he should have in his mind as likely to be affected by his act.

Factual situation: Krish, while driving a car at a high speed in a crowded road, knocked down a cyclist. The cyclist died on the spot with a lot of blood spilling around, Lekha, a pregnant woman passing by, suffered from a nervous shock, leading’ to abortion. Lekha filed a suit against Krishnan claiming damages. DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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: The occupier of a premise owes a duty of care to all his invitees and visitors.

Factual situation: Lalit was running a dairy from his house. People used a dart of his farm as a shortcut to get to a nearby railway station. Lalit who did not approve of this, put up a notice that “Trespassers will be prosecuted”. However, since a number of these people were also his customers he tolerated them. One day a person who was using this short cut was attacked by a bull belonging to the farm. The injured person filed a suit against him. DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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 master shall be liable for the acts of his servants done in the course of employment.

Factual situation: PUL, a public sector undertaking, is operating a number of bus services for its employees in Pune. These buses are quite distinct in their appearance and carry the board “for PUL employees only”. M, a villager from a neighbouring state, was waiting for a regular bus in one of the bus stops in Pune. A bus belonging to PUL happened to stop nearby and a number of people got into the bus. M, without realizing that it was a PUL bus, got into the bus and soon thereafter, the bus met with an accident due to driver’s negligence. M, along with several others, was injured in the accident. M seeks to file a suit against PUL claiming damages. DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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: The master/principal is liable for all acts done by his duly appointed servant/agent for all acts done by him lawfully in the course of his employment.

Factual situation: A, B, C and D carried on a business in partnership. While making a deal with another company, B bribed the clerk there. Is the partnership firm vicariously liable? DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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: Necessity knows no law, and any person facing danger may do all that is necessary to avert the same till he can take recourse to public authorities

Factual situation: Akshay, a law-abiding citizen decided to remove the weed of corruption from Indian society. One day, confronted with a bribing official, Akshay decided to teach him a lesson and punched him on his face. Akshay DECISION:

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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. Volenti non-fit injuria is defence to action in negligence.

Facts:
In a sad incident, 95 fans of a Football club died in a stampede in the Nehru Stadium. The court has decided that the accident was caused due to the negligence of the Police in permitting too many supporters to crowd in one part of the stadium. Now, a suit is filed by Harman and several other people against the Commissioner of State Police. Harman and the other claimants had relatives who were caught up in the Nehru Stadium disaster. The disaster was broadcast on live television, where several claimants alleged, they had witnessed friends and relatives die. Others were present in the stadium or had heard about the events in other ways. All claimed damages for the psychiatric harm they suffered as a result. Determine whether, for the purposes of establishing liability in negligence, those who suffer purely psychiatric harm from witnessing an event at which they are not physically present are sufficiently proximate for a duty to be owed, and thus can be said to be reasonably within the contemplation of the tortfeasor?

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined

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. Volenti non-fit injuria is a defence to action in negligence.

Facts:
X purchased a disused cinema with the intention of turning it into a Multiplex. Six weeks after, X entered the building for the first time, it was set on fire by intruders and destroyed. As a result, the adjacent buildings were also affected and damaged. The cinema building was a target for vandals and children who often played there, but X had had no knowledge of previous attempts to start a fire at the cinema buildings. The owners of the adjacent buildings brought an action for negligence against X on grounds that X failed to take reasonable care for the safety of the buildings by not keeping the cinema locked, making regular inspections and employing a caretaker. Decide whether the occupier of a property owes a duty of care to the adjoining occupiers in respect of acts of trespass on his property resulting in damage to the adjoining properties? 

[1] Legal Reasoning
Chapter: [1] Legal Reasoning
Concept: undefined >> undefined
< prev  3281 to 3300 of 5721  next > 
Advertisements
Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×