Advertisements
Advertisements
प्रश्न
Principle: A person is said to have committed assault when apprehension is caused in the mind of a person that he is about to use physical force against his body.
Facts: 'A' abuses 'B' while he was sitting in a moving train, by aggressively shaking his fists when 'B' was standing on the railway platform at a distance.
विकल्प
'A' has caused fear of assault in the mind of 'B'.
'A' has committed assault against 'B'.
A has not committed assault against 'B'.
'A' has caused apprehension of assault in the mind of 'B'.
उत्तर
A has not committed assault against 'B'.
Explanation:
Mere words do not amount to an assault. Here in the above-noted problem B was standing at a distance. For the assault, there must be minimum touching body of A. The reasonable conclusion drawn A has not committed assault against B. Hence "A has not committed assault against 'B'" is correct.
APPEARS IN
संबंधित प्रश्न
In this Question problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the question. In answering the following question, you should not rely on any rule(s) except the rule(s) that are supplied for problem. Further, you should not assume any fact other than 'those stated in the problem. The aim is to test your ability to properly apply a rule to a given set of facts, even when the result is absurd or unacceptable for any other reason. It is not the aim to test any knowledge of law you may already possess.
Rule:
Whoever finds an unattended object can keep it unless the true owner claims that object. This does not affect the property owner's right to the ownership of the property on which the object is found. The right to ownership of a property does not include the right to ownership of unattended objects on that property.
Facts:
Elizabeth is the CEO of a global management services company in Chennai and is on her way to Ranchi to deliver the convocation address at India's leading business school on the outskirts of Ranchi. Flying business class on Dolphin Airlines, she is entitled to use the lounge owned by the airline in Chennai Airport while waiting for her flight. She finds a diamond ear-ring on the floor of the lounge and gives it to the staff of Dolphin Airlines expressly stating that in the event of nobody claiming the ear-ring within six months, she would claim it back. The airline sells the ear-ring after eight months and Elizabeth files a case to recover the value of the ear-ring from the airline when she is informed about its sale. To the original fact scenario, the following fact is added: In the lounge there are numerous signboards which proclaim 'Any unattended item will be confiscated by Dolphin Airlines'. In this case, you would:
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: Where one of the parties to a contract was in the position to dominate the decision of the other party, the contract is enforceable only at the option of the party who was in a position to dominate the decision of the other party.
Facts: A doctor asked his patient to make a payment of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Ten Lac Only) for treatment of his fever. The patient paid an amount of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Five Lac Only) and promised to pay the remaining amount after the treatment. After treatment, the patient recovered from fever. The doctor demanded the remaining amount from the patient. The patient refused to pay.
The question consists of two statements, one labelled as a principle and other as Fact. You are to exa.mine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.
PRINCIPAL: ignorantia juris nonexcusat and ingnorantia facit excusat
FACT: George was a passenger from Zurich to Manila in a Swiss Plane. When the plane landed at the airport at Etombay on 28th Nov. 1962 it was found on search that George carried 34 kgs of gold bars in person and that he had not declared it in the 'Manifest for transfer. On 28th Nov. 1962 Govemment of India issued a notification and modified its earlier exemption and now it is necessary that the gold must be declared in the "Manifest" of the aircraft.
The question consists of two statements, one labelled as principle and other as Fact. You are to exa.mine the principle and apply it to the given facts carefully and select the best option.
PRINCIPLE: "Nobody shall unlawfully interfere with a person's use or enjoyment of land, 0( some right over, or in connection with it. The use or enjoyment, envisaged herein, should be normal and reasonable taking into account surrounding Situation.
FACT: jeevan and Pavan were neighbors in a residential locality. Pavan started a typing class in a part of his house and his typing sound disturbed jeevan who could not put up with any kind of continuous noise. He filed a suit against Pavan.
This question consists of principles and facts. The principal 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 the question, you must not rely on any principle except the principle that is given hereinbelow for the 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.
Therefore, to answer a question, the principle is to be applied to the given facts and to choose the most appropriate option.
Principle: Under the Employees Compensation Act, 1923, an employer is liable to pay compensation to his workmen for injuries sustained by them by an accident arising out of and in the course of employment.
Facts: M, the Manager of SRK Industries asked his secretary S to submit a report at the Government Labour Office. ‘S’ submitted the report as directed. On his way back S met one of his classmates. He then decided to have a cup of tea together at a wayside restaurant. Sometime later, ‘S’ got a message from his office to report back as it was a long time since he left the office. ‘S’ rushed back on his Motor Cycle. On his way back a Truck that was coming from a side road hit ‘S’. H e was admitted to a nearby hospital with multiple injuries. He claims compensation under the Employees Compensation Act from his employer.
Legal phrase is followed by four meanings. Choose the most appropriate option:
Bona vacantia
Mark the best option:
Joint heirs to a property are called -
Mark the best option:
English Law is also known as
The Copyright Act, 1957 came into effect from
In the case of the factory, ___________ of that factory shall be liable to pay the wages to employees employed by him as per the Payment of Wages Act.
