English

Legal Principle: Negligence is the Absence of Care by One Party Which Results in Some Damage to Another. Damage is an Essential Ingredient to Constitute a Tort of Negligence. - Mathematics

Advertisements
Advertisements

Question

Legal Principle: Negligence is the absence of care by one party which results in some damage to another. Damage is an essential ingredient to constitute a tort of negligence.

Fact Situation: Mistry left his ladder on the public road while unloading it from a truck when he went to open the shutters of his shop. Saini who was riding his motorcycle had to swerve hard to avoid hitting the ladder as he came with speed on the road. Saini fell down but was miraculously not injured.

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

Options

  • Mistry is not liable for the tort of negligence since Saini was not injured though he fell down.

  • Mistry is liable for the tort of negligence since Saini fell down due to the presence of the ladder.

  • Mistry is not liable for the tort of negligence since Saini was speeding on the road.

  • Mistry is liable for the tort of negligence since he was careless in leaving the ladder on the road.

MCQ

Solution

Mistry is liable for the tort of negligence since Saini fell down due to the presence of the ladder.

Explanation:

Negligent torts are not deliberate actions, but instead, present when an individual or entity fails to act as a  reasonable person to someone whom he or she owes a duty to. The negligent action found in this particular tort leads to a personal injury or monetary damages.  Thus the two major essentials of tort are (a) negligence and (b) damage or injury.  
Facts of the case presented before us mention that  Saini who was riding a motorcycle fell down due to  Mistry's negligence even though he did not get injured,  DAMAGE was caused to his motorcycle, clothes, time, etc. Thus we can easily conclude that "Mistry is liable for the tort of negligence since Saini fell down due to the presence of the ladder." is the most appropriate statement.   

shaalaa.com
Law of Torts (Entrance Exams)
  Is there an error in this question or solution?
2017-2018 (May) Set 1

RELATED QUESTIONS

Principle: Nothing is an offense by reason of any harm it may cause to another person if it is done in good faith and for the benefit of that person even without that person‘s consent.

Facts: A is attacked by a Lion and Lion drags him while he is crying for help. B, a passer-by picks up A‘s gun in good faith and fires at Lion which injures A. B has never used the gun before. 


Principle: Where a person lawfully does anything for another person, or delivers anything to him, not intending to do so or to provide gratuitously, and such other person takes the benefit of that; the latter is bound to compensate the former for something is done or thing provided, or to restore, the thing so delivered.

Facts: Trader 'A' delivers certain eatables at B's house by mistake. 'B' consumed the eatables without asking anything. Which of the following derivations is correct?


Principle: Whoever does not arrest the killer and report the matter to the concerned authorities commits an offence.

Facts: 'A', a woman, sees 'B', another woman, killing a third woman 'C'. 'A' neither attempted to arrest 'B' nor informed the concerned authorities.


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

Principle: An offer made by one party when accepted by another makes it a contract.

Transactions:
1. P offered to sell his house for Rs. 20 lakhs to R; R told P that he was interested to buy a house for 15 lakhs only.
2. C was looking for a house for not more than 25 lakhs; P informed C that his house was available for 20 lakhs.
3. K wanted to buy some old furniture; L told K that he would sell his furniture for Rs. 10, 000.
4. R advertised to sell his old car for a price of Rs. Three lakhs; S found the advertisement and offered to buy it for Rs. 2 lakhs 50 thousand; R agrees to sell it to S.

Which among the above is actually a contract?


Legal Principle: The Latin maxim nemo bis punitur pro eodem delictomeans that nobody can be punished twice for the same offence.

Fact Situation: Sajan, a petty thief, is caught and thrashed thoroughly by the people before being handed over to the police. Sajan pleads before the magistrate that since he was already thrashed by the people he should not be again punished by the State.

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


According to the Human Development Report 2006, India has acquired 126th place in HDI ranking which is. than that of last year.


Consent defines as


PRINCIPLE A master is liable for the acts of servant done in the course of employment.

FACTS A nurse was deployed for the care of an old invalid suffering a very painful and terminal illness in a hospice. A visiting doctor used to come in every week and prescribe certain medications. In order to alleviate the pain, she used to slip in certain narcotic drugs to the patient with whom she had developed a friendly relationship. The narcotics eventually reacted with the drugs of the doctor's prescription thereby inducing a fatal cardiac arrest in the patient. In a suit brought by the legal heirs of the patient, the suit shall


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:

1. Joint tort-feasters means joint wrongdoers. People can be joint tortfeasors in case of common action in fact or in law.

2. Joint tort-feasters are jointly and severally liable.

Factual situation: Two dogs belonging to two different owners acting in concert attacked a flock of sheep and injured several sheep. In an action for damages brought against the owners of the dogs. If one of them puts a defene claiming that he was liable for one half only of the damage, then which one of the following statements is legally sustainable in the above case? DECISION:


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: The owner of immovable property is entitled to the column of airspace above the surface. However, the owner's right to air and space above his land is restricted to such height as is necessary for the ordinary use and enjoyment of his land and the structures on it.

Factual Situation: Galaxy Cable TV Network Company is providing cable connections to their customers. One of the cables passes over the house of Mr. Vasanth Bhat., He is not a customer of the Network Company. The cable is neither attached to his house nor to any projection thereof.  
It is at a distance of 20 ft above the terrace of Mr. Bhat's two-storied house. Because of the cable, Mr. Bhat's son Sachin is unable to fly a kite from the terrace. Mr. Bhat requested the Network Company to change the position of the cable.  But the company did not bother to change it. One evening,  Mr. Bhat out the cable and cleared the airspace above his house. The Network Company suffered a loss of about   1000.  They bring legal action against Mr. Bhat for recovery of loss suffered. DECISION


Share
Notifications

Englishहिंदीमराठी


      Forgot password?
Use app×