All Exams >
CLAT >
Weekly Test for CLAT UG >
All Questions
All questions of Week 5 for CLAT Exam
Which of the following is a perfect square number?
- a)222222
- b)23453
- c)1681
- d)1057
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Which of the following is a perfect square number?
a)
222222
b)
23453
c)
1681
d)
1057
|
Shashwat Singh answered |
The answer is 1681 because it is the only number which has it's last digit as a number which a perfect square can have . 9×9=81 the last digit is 1.
Find the perfect square number between 30 and 40.
- a)36
- b)49
- c)25
- d)none of these
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Find the perfect square number between 30 and 40.
a)
36
b)
49
c)
25
d)
none of these
|
Amita Verma answered |
Since, 1 x 1 = 1
2 x 2 = 4
3 x 3 = 9
4 x 4 = 16
5 x 5 = 25
6 x 6 = 36
7 x 7 = 49
Thus, 36 is a perfact square number between 30 and 40.
Which of the following would end with digit 1?- a)1232
- b)1612
- c)772
- d)822
Correct answer is 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Which of the following would end with digit 1?
a)
1232
b)
1612
c)
772
d)
822
|
Sneha Singh answered |
Option B is correct because the unit digit of 161 is 1 and if unit digit of any digit ends with 1 the its square will also end with 1.
Without doing any calculation, find the numbers which are surely perfect squares.- a)441
- b)408
- c)153
- d)257
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Without doing any calculation, find the numbers which are surely perfect squares.
a)
441
b)
408
c)
153
d)
257
|
KS Coaching Center answered |
The perfect squares have 0,1,2,4,5,6 or 9 at their units place.
Therefore153,257 and 408 are surely not perfect squares.
Therefore153,257 and 408 are surely not perfect squares.
PRINCIPLE: Nuisance as a tort (Civil wrong) means an unlawful interference with a person’s use of enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it.FACTS: During the scarcity of onions, long queues were made outside the defendant’s shop, who, having a license to sell fruits and vegetables, used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighboring shops. The neighboring shopkeepers brought and action for nuisance against the defendant- a)The defendant is liable for nuisance
- b)The defendant was not liable for nuisance
- c)The defendant was liable under the principle of strict liability
- d)The plaintiff’s should be decreed in his favour
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLE: Nuisance as a tort (Civil wrong) means an unlawful interference with a person’s use of enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it.
FACTS: During the scarcity of onions, long queues were made outside the defendant’s shop, who, having a license to sell fruits and vegetables, used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighboring shops. The neighboring shopkeepers brought and action for nuisance against the defendant
a)
The defendant is liable for nuisance
b)
The defendant was not liable for nuisance
c)
The defendant was liable under the principle of strict liability
d)
The plaintiff’s should be decreed in his favour
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct option is A
- Nuisance is an unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land, or of some right over, or in connection with it. Nuisance is an injury to the right of a person in possession of a property to undisturbed enjoyment of it and result from an improper use by another person in his property.
- In the present case, the fruits and vegetable seller was lawfully selling his fruits and vegetables as he had a license to do so. Moreover, the queue before his shops was because of people who needed onions from him and not directly because of him as he is not interfering with others' use or enjoyment of land or some right over, or in connection with it. Hence, the defendant is not liable for nuisance.
Without adding, find the sum. 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 9- a)16
- b)36
- c)9
- d)25
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Without adding, find the sum. 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 9
a)
16
b)
36
c)
9
d)
25
|
Lakesway Classes answered |
Here, we have to find the sum of first five odd natural numbers.
Therefore, 1 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 9 = (5)2 = 25
Eat his heart out.Being an introvert, he will only eat "his heart out".- a)eat too much
- b)keep brooding
- c)invite trouble
- d)suffer silently
- e)none of these
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Eat his heart out.
Being an introvert, he will only eat "his heart out".
a)
eat too much
b)
keep brooding
c)
invite trouble
d)
suffer silently
e)
none of these
|
Meera Rana answered |
To eat your heart out is to feel jealous or envious of someone else's achievements or good fortune. Occasionally, it means to feel other strong emotions, especially grief, bitterness, or worry over something.
Ride rough shod.Do not "ride rough shod" over the poor.- a)ride over
- b)drive a sledge
- c)treat harshly
- d)pamper
- e)none of these
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Ride rough shod.
Do not "ride rough shod" over the poor.
a)
ride over
b)
drive a sledge
c)
treat harshly
d)
pamper
e)
none of these
|
|
Meera Rana answered |
The idiom ‘ride roughshod’ means to completely ignore the rights, opinions, or feelings of others. So treating harshly is the best suitable option.
Made light ofHe "made light of" his teacher’s advice.a)rejectedb)listenedc)ignoredd)disregardede)none of theseCorrect answer is option 'e'. Can you explain this answer?
|
|
Meera Rana answered |
Meaning of made light = to act as if something is not serious.
So, all the 4 options are wrong other than E.
So, all the 4 options are wrong other than E.
PRINCIPLES: 1. When a person unlawfully interferes in the chattel of another person by which the latter is deprived of its use, the former commits the tort of conversion.2. Nobody shall enrich himself at other’s expense.FACTS: A patient suffering from stomach ailment approached a teaching hospital. He was diagnosed as suffering from appendicitis and his appendix was removed. He became alright. The hospital however found some unique cells in the appendix, and using the cell lines thereof, it developed drugs of enormous commercial value. When the erstwhile patient came to know about it, he claimed a share in the profit made by the hospital.POSSIBLE DECISIONS:(a) The hospital need not share its profits with the patient.
(b) The hospital may share its profits on ex gratis basis.
(c) The hospital shall share its profits with the patient.POSSIBLE REASONS:(i) The patient, far from being deprived of the use of his appendix, actually benefitted by its removal.
(ii) The hospital instead of throwing away the appendix conducted further research on it on its own and the development of drug was the result of its own effort.
(iii) The hospital could not have achieved its success without that appendix belonging to the patient.
(iv) Everybody must care for and share with others.Your decision with the reason:- a)(a) (i)
- b)(a) (ii)
- c)(c) (iii)
- d)(c) (iv)
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLES: 1. When a person unlawfully interferes in the chattel of another person by which the latter is deprived of its use, the former commits the tort of conversion.
2. Nobody shall enrich himself at other’s expense.
FACTS: A patient suffering from stomach ailment approached a teaching hospital. He was diagnosed as suffering from appendicitis and his appendix was removed. He became alright. The hospital however found some unique cells in the appendix, and using the cell lines thereof, it developed drugs of enormous commercial value. When the erstwhile patient came to know about it, he claimed a share in the profit made by the hospital.
POSSIBLE DECISIONS:
(a) The hospital need not share its profits with the patient.
(b) The hospital may share its profits on ex gratis basis.
(c) The hospital shall share its profits with the patient.
(b) The hospital may share its profits on ex gratis basis.
(c) The hospital shall share its profits with the patient.
POSSIBLE REASONS:
(i) The patient, far from being deprived of the use of his appendix, actually benefitted by its removal.
(ii) The hospital instead of throwing away the appendix conducted further research on it on its own and the development of drug was the result of its own effort.
(iii) The hospital could not have achieved its success without that appendix belonging to the patient.
(iv) Everybody must care for and share with others.
(ii) The hospital instead of throwing away the appendix conducted further research on it on its own and the development of drug was the result of its own effort.
(iii) The hospital could not have achieved its success without that appendix belonging to the patient.
(iv) Everybody must care for and share with others.
Your decision with the reason:
a)
(a) (i)
b)
(a) (ii)
c)
(c) (iii)
d)
(c) (iv)
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
Decision:
(a) The hospital need not share its profits with the patient.
Reason:
- (i) The patient, far from being deprived of the use of his appendix, actually benefitted by its removal.
- (ii) The hospital instead of throwing away the appendix conducted further research on it on its own and the development of the drug was the result of its own effort.
Explanation:
Based on the principles and facts, the hospital does not have to share its profits with the patient. This is because the patient was not deprived of the use of his appendix, but rather benefitted from its removal as it cured his stomach ailment. Moreover, the hospital used its resources and expertise to conduct research on the removed appendix and develop the commercially valuable drugs. The patient did not contribute to the development of the drug, and the hospital's success was due to its own efforts and research.
DIRECTIONS: Each of the following questions contains an idiom and its usage in a sentence, followed by five possible meanings labelled A, B, C, D and E. Pick out the right meaning of the idiom in question and mark your answer accordingly.Q. Hole and corner.I have come to know of your "hole and corner" method of dealing with people.a)strictb)servilec)secretd)suspiciouse)none of theseCorrect answer is 'c'. Can you explain this answer?
|
|
Meera Rana answered |
Meaning of Hole and corner: Shady and secretive, typically to hide illicit activity.
P is the sister of I, Q is married to M, E is grandmother of F. - K is the father of A, Q is married to only brother of K
- P has only two children one is daughter and one is son
- H is granddaughter of N, who is father of I, A’s maternal uncle has only one child F
- G and A are cousin
Q.
How is E related to A?- a)Mother
- b)Aunt
- c)Grandmother
- d)Cannot be determined
- e)Sister
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
P is the sister of I, Q is married to M, E is grandmother of F.
- K is the father of A, Q is married to only brother of K
- P has only two children one is daughter and one is son
- H is granddaughter of N, who is father of I, A’s maternal uncle has only one child F
- G and A are cousin
Q.
How is E related to A?
How is E related to A?
a)
Mother
b)
Aunt
c)
Grandmother
d)
Cannot be determined
e)
Sister
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct answer is C as A 's maternal uncle has only one child F . So this concludes that A and F are cousins and since E is grandmother of F so she will be the grandmother of his cousin A too.
Principle: The employer is liable to pay compensation for the injuries suffered by his workers, if the accident has arisen out of and in the course of employment. The liability is absolute and the employer will not have any defences if the accident results in death or total disablement.Facts: Mr. Tharun is working as an unskilled worker in the furniture fabricating industry run by Mr. Omar in Bangalore. While Mr. Tharun and his co-workers were working on the preparation of a double decker iron cot, the thick iron sheet fell on the head of Mr. Tharun. He suffered serious head injuries. He was hospitalized and he died in the hospital. In the Government Hospital, where Mr. Tharun was admitted, the doctors delayed attending Mr. Tharun. It was also found out in the course of treatment that Mr. Tharun was drunk at the time when the accident occurred.- a)The hospital and the Government are liable to pay compensation to the dependents of Mr. Tharun as there was negligence on the part of the doctors.
- b)Mr. Omar is not liable to pay any compensation to the dependents of Mr. Tharun as he was drunk at the time of the accident.
- c)Mr. Omar is liable to pay compensation as per the law to the dependents of Mr. Tharun.
- d)Mr. Omar can argue that the drunken condition of Mr. Tharun is the reason for hisdeath.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle: The employer is liable to pay compensation for the injuries suffered by his workers, if the accident has arisen out of and in the course of employment. The liability is absolute and the employer will not have any defences if the accident results in death or total disablement.
Facts: Mr. Tharun is working as an unskilled worker in the furniture fabricating industry run by Mr. Omar in Bangalore. While Mr. Tharun and his co-workers were working on the preparation of a double decker iron cot, the thick iron sheet fell on the head of Mr. Tharun. He suffered serious head injuries. He was hospitalized and he died in the hospital. In the Government Hospital, where Mr. Tharun was admitted, the doctors delayed attending Mr. Tharun. It was also found out in the course of treatment that Mr. Tharun was drunk at the time when the accident occurred.
a)
The hospital and the Government are liable to pay compensation to the dependents of Mr. Tharun as there was negligence on the part of the doctors.
b)
Mr. Omar is not liable to pay any compensation to the dependents of Mr. Tharun as he was drunk at the time of the accident.
c)
Mr. Omar is liable to pay compensation as per the law to the dependents of Mr. Tharun.
d)
Mr. Omar can argue that the drunken condition of Mr. Tharun is the reason for hisdeath.
|
Dia Mehta answered |
Here it does't matters that Tharun was drunk or doctor delayed in attending him but the pointis that it all occurs during course of employment so the master is liable. Stick to the principle. Correct answer is C .
PRINCIPLES: 1. An employer shall be liable for the wrongs committed by his employees in the course of employment.
2. Third parties must exercise reasonable care to find out whether a person is actually acting in the course of employment.FACTS: Nandan was appointed by Syndicate Bank to collect small savings from its customers spread over in different places on daily basis. Nagamma, a housemaid, was one of such ‘customers making use of Nandan’s service.
Syndicate Bank after a couple of years terminated Nandan’s service. Nagamma, unaware of this fact, was handing over her savings to Nandan who misappropriated them. Nagamma realised this nearly after three months, when she went to the Bank to withdraw money. She filed a complaint against the Bank.POSSIBLE DECISION:(a) Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Nagamma.
(b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Nagamma.
(c) Nagamma has to blame herself for her negligence.POSSIBLE REASONS:(i) Nandan was not acting in the course of employment after the termination of his service.
(ii) A person cannot blame others for his own negligence.
(iii) Nagamma was entitled to be informed by the Bank about Nandan.
(iv) The Bank is entitled to expect its customers to know actual position.Your decision with the reason:- a)(b) (i)
- b)(c) (ii)
- c)(a) (iii)
- d)(b) (iv)
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLES: 1. An employer shall be liable for the wrongs committed by his employees in the course of employment.
2. Third parties must exercise reasonable care to find out whether a person is actually acting in the course of employment.
2. Third parties must exercise reasonable care to find out whether a person is actually acting in the course of employment.
FACTS: Nandan was appointed by Syndicate Bank to collect small savings from its customers spread over in different places on daily basis. Nagamma, a housemaid, was one of such ‘customers making use of Nandan’s service.
Syndicate Bank after a couple of years terminated Nandan’s service. Nagamma, unaware of this fact, was handing over her savings to Nandan who misappropriated them. Nagamma realised this nearly after three months, when she went to the Bank to withdraw money. She filed a complaint against the Bank.
Syndicate Bank after a couple of years terminated Nandan’s service. Nagamma, unaware of this fact, was handing over her savings to Nandan who misappropriated them. Nagamma realised this nearly after three months, when she went to the Bank to withdraw money. She filed a complaint against the Bank.
POSSIBLE DECISION:
(a) Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Nagamma.
(b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Nagamma.
(c) Nagamma has to blame herself for her negligence.
(b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Nagamma.
(c) Nagamma has to blame herself for her negligence.
POSSIBLE REASONS:
(i) Nandan was not acting in the course of employment after the termination of his service.
(ii) A person cannot blame others for his own negligence.
(iii) Nagamma was entitled to be informed by the Bank about Nandan.
(iv) The Bank is entitled to expect its customers to know actual position.
(ii) A person cannot blame others for his own negligence.
(iii) Nagamma was entitled to be informed by the Bank about Nandan.
(iv) The Bank is entitled to expect its customers to know actual position.
Your decision with the reason:
a)
(b) (i)
b)
(c) (ii)
c)
(a) (iii)
d)
(b) (iv)
|
S.S Career Academy answered |
Possible Decision:- (a) Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Nagamma.- (b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Nagamma.- (c) Nagamma has to blame herself for her negligence.Possible Reasons:- (i) Nandan was not acting in the course of employment after the termination of his service.- (ii) A person cannot blame others for his own negligence.- (iii) Nagamma was entitled to be informed by the Bank about Nandan.- (iv) The Bank is entitled to expect its customers to know the actual position.Your decision with the reason:A: (b) (i) B: (c) (ii)C: (a) (iii)D: (b) (iv)Answer: C. Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Nagamma.Explanation:According to the principles mentioned, an employer shall be liable for the wrongs committed by its employees in the course of employment. Since Nandan was appointed by Syndicate Bank to collect small savings from customers, the Bank should have informed Nagamma and other customers about the termination of Nandan's service. As Nagamma was not aware of this fact, she continued to hand over her savings to Nandan, who misappropriated them. Thus, the Bank should take responsibility for not informing its customers about the change in Nandan's employment status and compensate Nagamma for her loss.
PRINCIPLE: Damages are the money recompense, as far as money can do, for the violation of a right.FACTS: A, an Indian citizen, having a right to vote, was not allowed to cast his vote on the polling booth, by the returning officer. Name of A was mentioned in the voter’s list. A has also reported at the polling booth in time. However, the candidate in whose favour A would have cast his vote won the election. A filed a suit claiming damages.- a)A will be entitled to damages
- b)A will not be entitled to damages
- c)A will be entitled to only nominal damages
- d)A will be entitled to exemplary damages
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLE: Damages are the money recompense, as far as money can do, for the violation of a right.
FACTS: A, an Indian citizen, having a right to vote, was not allowed to cast his vote on the polling booth, by the returning officer. Name of A was mentioned in the voter’s list. A has also reported at the polling booth in time. However, the candidate in whose favour A would have cast his vote won the election. A filed a suit claiming damages.
a)
A will be entitled to damages
b)
A will not be entitled to damages
c)
A will be entitled to only nominal damages
d)
A will be entitled to exemplary damages
|
Varsha choudhary answered |
List, but the returning officer refused to allow him to vote. A filed a case for violation of his right to vote and claimed damages in the court.
DECISION: The court held that A's right to vote was violated by the returning officer, and he is entitled to damages for the same. Damages are the money recompense, as far as money can do, for the violation of a right. In this case, A was deprived of his right to vote, which is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of India. Therefore, the court awarded damages to A as a compensation for the violation of his right to vote.
DECISION: The court held that A's right to vote was violated by the returning officer, and he is entitled to damages for the same. Damages are the money recompense, as far as money can do, for the violation of a right. In this case, A was deprived of his right to vote, which is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution of India. Therefore, the court awarded damages to A as a compensation for the violation of his right to vote.
Stalking horse.The trade union’s seemingly rightful demand is only a "stalking horse" to blackmail the management.- a)trick
- b)proposal
- c)pretence
- d)suggestion
- e)none of these
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Stalking horse.
The trade union’s seemingly rightful demand is only a "stalking horse" to blackmail the management.
a)
trick
b)
proposal
c)
pretence
d)
suggestion
e)
none of these
|
|
Meera Rana answered |
A stalking horse is a thing or person used to disguise someone's real intentions. Most often, the stalking horse is a decoy used as a distraction, or it is a way to test the viability of a concept before putting one's resources and reputation behind that concept.
Consider the following statements about a computer named “ Greenware” .
1. ‘Greenware’ is completely free of both hazardous PVC (Polyvinylchloride) and BFR (brominated flame-retardants).
2. Manufacturing of ‘Greenware’ can be a special action like replacing all standard light bulbs with CFLs or a more general application to live more ecologically.Q. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?- a)1 only
- b)2 only
- c)Both 1 and 2
- d)Neither 1 nor 2
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Consider the following statements about a computer named “ Greenware” .
1. ‘Greenware’ is completely free of both hazardous PVC (Polyvinylchloride) and BFR (brominated flame-retardants).
2. Manufacturing of ‘Greenware’ can be a special action like replacing all standard light bulbs with CFLs or a more general application to live more ecologically.
1. ‘Greenware’ is completely free of both hazardous PVC (Polyvinylchloride) and BFR (brominated flame-retardants).
2. Manufacturing of ‘Greenware’ can be a special action like replacing all standard light bulbs with CFLs or a more general application to live more ecologically.
Q. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
a)
1 only
b)
2 only
c)
Both 1 and 2
d)
Neither 1 nor 2
|
Sounak Basu answered |
‘Greenware’ is completely free of both hazardous PVC and BFR and its manufacturing can be a special action like replacing all standard light bulbs with CFLs or a more general application to live more ecologically.
______are words which appear innocent, but contain a latent meaning which is defamatory- a)Libel
- b)Slander
- c)Innuendoes
- d)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
______are words which appear innocent, but contain a latent meaning which is defamatory
a)
Libel
b)
Slander
c)
Innuendoes
d)
None of the above
|
Eshaan Kapoor answered |
Innuendoes is an indirect way of talking about somebody/something, usually suggesting something bad or rude.
______ is an act which is twisted, crooked, which is not straight and lawful- a)Tort
- b)Crime
- c)Wrong
- d)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
______ is an act which is twisted, crooked, which is not straight and lawful
a)
Tort
b)
Crime
c)
Wrong
d)
None of the above
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
Answer: A. Tort
Explanation:
A tort is a civil wrong that causes harm or loss to another individual, leading to legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. The main characteristics of a tort include:
- Twisted, crooked, and not straight: A tort is an act that deviates from what is considered lawful and reasonable behavior, causing harm or loss to someone else.
- Not a crime: While crimes are also unlawful acts, torts are distinct from crimes. A crime is a violation of the law that leads to criminal prosecution, while a tort is a civil matter that leads to legal liability and compensation for the injured party.
- Requires a remedy: The main purpose of tort law is to provide a remedy, usually in the form of monetary compensation, to the injured party. This is different from criminal law, where the main purpose is to punish the wrongdoer and protect society.
- Based on fault: Most torts are based on fault or negligence, meaning that the person who commits the tortious act is responsible for the consequences of their actions.
In summary, a tort is an act that is twisted, crooked, and not straight, leading to legal liability for the person who commits the act. It is different from a crime, as it is a civil wrong rather than a criminal offense, and the main aim is to provide a remedy to the injured party.
Explanation:
A tort is a civil wrong that causes harm or loss to another individual, leading to legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. The main characteristics of a tort include:
- Twisted, crooked, and not straight: A tort is an act that deviates from what is considered lawful and reasonable behavior, causing harm or loss to someone else.
- Not a crime: While crimes are also unlawful acts, torts are distinct from crimes. A crime is a violation of the law that leads to criminal prosecution, while a tort is a civil matter that leads to legal liability and compensation for the injured party.
- Requires a remedy: The main purpose of tort law is to provide a remedy, usually in the form of monetary compensation, to the injured party. This is different from criminal law, where the main purpose is to punish the wrongdoer and protect society.
- Based on fault: Most torts are based on fault or negligence, meaning that the person who commits the tortious act is responsible for the consequences of their actions.
In summary, a tort is an act that is twisted, crooked, and not straight, leading to legal liability for the person who commits the act. It is different from a crime, as it is a civil wrong rather than a criminal offense, and the main aim is to provide a remedy to the injured party.
PRINCIPLE: “Nobody shall unlawfully interfere with a person’s use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it. The use or enjoyment, envisaged herein, should be normal and reasonable taking into account surrounding situation”FACTS: Jeevan and Pavan were neighbours in 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 and kind of continuous noise. He filed a suit against Pavan.- a)Pavan is liable, because he should not have started typing class in his house
- b)Pavan is liable, because as his neighbour, he should have realized Jeevan’s delicate nature.
- c)Pavan is not liable, because typing sound did not disturb anyone else other than Jeevan.
- d)None of these
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLE: “Nobody shall unlawfully interfere with a person’s use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it. The use or enjoyment, envisaged herein, should be normal and reasonable taking into account surrounding situation
”FACTS: Jeevan and Pavan were neighbours in 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 and kind of continuous noise. He filed a suit against Pavan.
a)
Pavan is liable, because he should not have started typing class in his house
b)
Pavan is liable, because as his neighbour, he should have realized Jeevan’s delicate nature.
c)
Pavan is not liable, because typing sound did not disturb anyone else other than Jeevan.
d)
None of these
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct option is C.
The principle states that nobody shall unlawfully interfere with a person’s use or enjoyment.
Hence starting a typing class is not an unlawful activity therefore pavan is not liable.
The term ‘Scienter’ is related to which one of the following sign boards- a)Trespassers will be prosecuted
- b)beware of dogs
- c)no parking
- d)no admission without permission
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
The term ‘Scienter’ is related to which one of the following sign boards
a)
Trespassers will be prosecuted
b)
beware of dogs
c)
no parking
d)
no admission without permission
|
|
Eshaan Kapoor answered |
The term 'Scienter' is related to the following sign board:B: Beware of dogsExplanation:- 'Scienter' is a legal term derived from Latin, meaning "knowingly" or "with knowledge".- In the context of the "Beware of dogs" sign, the term 'Scienter' is used to imply that the property owner has knowledge of a potentially dangerous dog on their premises.- By displaying this sign, the property owner is warning others of a potential danger and protecting themselves from legal liability if someone is injured by the dog.- This sign helps to establish that the person entering the property was aware of the potential risk and chose to proceed, which can be used as a defense in case of a lawsuit.
Practice Quiz or MCQ (Multiple Choice Questions) with solutions are available for Practice, which would help you prepare for chapter Squares and Square Roots, Class 8, Mathematics . You can practice these practice quizzes as per your speed and improvise the topic.Q.Which of the following is a perfect square number?- a)222222
- b)23453
- c)1681
- d)1057
Correct answer is 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Practice Quiz or MCQ (Multiple Choice Questions) with solutions are available for Practice, which would help you prepare for chapter Squares and Square Roots, Class 8, Mathematics . You can practice these practice quizzes as per your speed and improvise the topic.
Q.
Which of the following is a perfect square number?
a)
222222
b)
23453
c)
1681
d)
1057
|
Sanjana Bose answered |
A number is a perfect square (or a square number) if its square root is an integer; that is to say, it is the product of an integer with itself. Here, the square root of 1681 is 41.
Therefore, the square root of 1681 is an integer, and as a consequence 1681 is a perfect square.
As a consequence, 41 is the square root of 1681.
A is the mother of D. D is the mother of S. S is the daughter of P. P is the brother of L. L is the mother of M. M is the daughter of Q and Q is the son of D?Q.
How is S related to L?- a)Son
- b)Niece
- c)Daughter
- d)Nephew
- e)Can’t be determined
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
A is the mother of D. D is the mother of S. S is the daughter of P. P is the brother of L. L is the mother of M. M is the daughter of Q and Q is the son of D?
Q.
How is S related to L?
How is S related to L?
a)
Son
b)
Niece
c)
Daughter
d)
Nephew
e)
Can’t be determined
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
The correct option is B.
Acc. to question "S" is the daughter of "D" & "P" and "P" is brother of "L" so "S" is niece of "L"
PRINCIPLES: 1. A person is liable for negligence, if he fails to take care of his neighbor’s interest.
2. A neighbour is anyone whose interests should have been foreseeable by a reasonable man while carrying on his activities.FACTS: A cricket match was going on in a closed door stadium. A cricket fan who could not get into the stadium was watching the game by climbing up a nearby tree and sitting there. The cricket ball in the course of the game went out of the stadium and hit this person and injured him. He filed a suit against the organizers.POSSIBLE DECISIONS:(a) The organizers are liable to compensate the injured person.
(b) The organizers are not liable to compensate the injured person.
(c) The injured person should have avoided the place where he might be hit by the cricket ball.POSSIBLE REASONS:(i) The organizers are responsible for the people inside the stadium.
(ii) The organizers could not have foreseen somebody watching the game by climbing up a tree.
(iii) A person crazy about something must pay the price for that.
(iv) The organizers shall be liable to everybody likely to watch the game.
Your decision with the reason:- a)(a) (iv)
- b)(a) (iii)
- c)(b) (ii)
- d)(c) (i)
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLES: 1. A person is liable for negligence, if he fails to take care of his neighbor’s interest.
2. A neighbour is anyone whose interests should have been foreseeable by a reasonable man while carrying on his activities.
2. A neighbour is anyone whose interests should have been foreseeable by a reasonable man while carrying on his activities.
FACTS: A cricket match was going on in a closed door stadium. A cricket fan who could not get into the stadium was watching the game by climbing up a nearby tree and sitting there. The cricket ball in the course of the game went out of the stadium and hit this person and injured him. He filed a suit against the organizers.
POSSIBLE DECISIONS:
(a) The organizers are liable to compensate the injured person.
(b) The organizers are not liable to compensate the injured person.
(c) The injured person should have avoided the place where he might be hit by the cricket ball.
(b) The organizers are not liable to compensate the injured person.
(c) The injured person should have avoided the place where he might be hit by the cricket ball.
POSSIBLE REASONS:
(i) The organizers are responsible for the people inside the stadium.
(ii) The organizers could not have foreseen somebody watching the game by climbing up a tree.
(iii) A person crazy about something must pay the price for that.
(iv) The organizers shall be liable to everybody likely to watch the game.
Your decision with the reason:
(ii) The organizers could not have foreseen somebody watching the game by climbing up a tree.
(iii) A person crazy about something must pay the price for that.
(iv) The organizers shall be liable to everybody likely to watch the game.
Your decision with the reason:
a)
(a) (iv)
b)
(a) (iii)
c)
(b) (ii)
d)
(c) (i)
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
In this case, the correct decision is:Decision C: The organizers are not liable to compensate the injured person.Possible reasons for this decision are:- Reason ii: The organizers could not have foreseen somebody watching the game by climbing up a tree. They are responsible for the safety of the people inside the stadium, but they cannot be expected to predict or prevent all possible dangers to individuals who choose to watch the game from unconventional and potentially unsafe locations.In contrast, the other possible decisions and their reasons are not as relevant or appropriate in this scenario:- Decision A (organizers are liable) with Reason iii (a person crazy about something must pay the price for that) does not make sense because it contradicts the decision itself. If the injured person must pay the price for their behavior, then the organizers should not be held liable.- Decision A with Reason iv (the organizers shall be liable to everybody likely to watch the game) is not accurate because the organizers cannot reasonably be expected to be responsible for the safety of individuals who choose to watch the game from locations outside the stadium, especially if those locations are potentially dangerous.- Decision D (the injured person should have avoided the place where he might be hit by the cricket ball) with Reason i (the organizers are responsible for the people inside the stadium) is not the best option because it does not directly address the liability of the organizers for the injured person's actions. The focus should be on whether the organizers could reasonably foresee and prevent the injury, which they could not.
Ms. Usha wants to file a suit against Bhagyalaxmi Theatre praying for a permanent injunction (stay order) restraining the theatre from running the film named “Jai Santoshi Maa”. Her contention is that the film hurt her religious feelings and sentiments as Goddess Saraswati, Laxmi and Parvati were depicted as jealous and were ridiculed.- a)She cannot file a suit because injury to religious feelings is not a legally recognized right.
- b)She cannot file a suit because the Theatre has a fundamental right to speech and expression.
- c)She can file a suit as injury to religious feelings has been legally recognized as a right (injuria sine damnum).
- d)It is a case of complete judicial discretion.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Ms. Usha wants to file a suit against Bhagyalaxmi Theatre praying for a permanent injunction (stay order) restraining the theatre from running the film named “Jai Santoshi Maa”. Her contention is that the film hurt her religious feelings and sentiments as Goddess Saraswati, Laxmi and Parvati were depicted as jealous and were ridiculed.
a)
She cannot file a suit because injury to religious feelings is not a legally recognized right.
b)
She cannot file a suit because the Theatre has a fundamental right to speech and expression.
c)
She can file a suit as injury to religious feelings has been legally recognized as a right (injuria sine damnum).
d)
It is a case of complete judicial discretion.
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
This case belongs to nuisance, the leading case of Usha ben V bhagyalakshmi chitra mandir.
Principle: A master is liable for the acts committed by his servant in the course of employment.
Fact: “A” instructs his driver “B” to drive his vehicle from the office back to home. He is also instructed not to carry any unauthorized person in the car. “B” one day while driving empty car back to home picks up his friend, “C”, who stays close to A’s house. In the course of driving the car towards A’s house, he collides with a vehicle.”C” is injured in the accident. Is A liable to compensate to C?
- a)A shall not be liable, B was not in the course of employment when he took C inside the car.
- b)A shall be liable, because B was in the course of employment at the time of accident
- c)C got into the car at his own risk, and therefore, he cannot sue anybody.
- d)A shall not be liable, as he had instructed B not to give lift to unauthorized persons.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle: A master is liable for the acts committed by his servant in the course of employment.
Fact: “A” instructs his driver “B” to drive his vehicle from the office back to home. He is also instructed not to carry any unauthorized person in the car. “B” one day while driving empty car back to home picks up his friend, “C”, who stays close to A’s house. In the course of driving the car towards A’s house, he collides with a vehicle.”C” is injured in the accident. Is A liable to compensate to C?
a)
A shall not be liable, B was not in the course of employment when he took C inside the car.
b)
A shall be liable, because B was in the course of employment at the time of accident
c)
C got into the car at his own risk, and therefore, he cannot sue anybody.
d)
A shall not be liable, as he had instructed B not to give lift to unauthorized persons.
|
Shefali mehta answered |
This principle states that if a servant commits an act while performing their job duties, the master (employer) is responsible for the consequences of that act. The fact presented in the question is missing, so it cannot be determined whether it is related to the principle or not.
PRINCIPLES: 1. If A is asked to do something by B, B is responsible for the act, not A.
2. If A, while acting for B commits a wrong, A is responsible for the wrong, not B.
3. If A is authorised to do something for B, but in the name of A without disclosing B’s presence, both A and B may be held liable.FACTS: Somu contracted with Amar whereunder Amar would buy a pumpset to be used in Somu’s farm. Such a pumpset was in short supply in the market. Gulab, a dealer, had such a pumpset and he refused to sell it to Amar. Amar threatened Gulab of serious consequences if he fails to part with the pumpset. Gulab filed a complaint against Amar.PROPOSED DECISION:(a) Amar alone is liable for the wrong though he acted for Somu.
(b) Amar is not liable for the wrong, though he is bound by the contract with Somu.
(c) Somu is bound by the contract and liable for the wrong.
(d) Both Somu and Amar are liable for the wrong.SUGGESTED REASONS:(i) Amar committed the wrong while acting for the benefit of Somu.
(ii) Amar cannot do while acting for Somu something which he cannot do while acting for himself.
(iii) Both Amar and Somu are liable since they are bound by the contract.
(iv) Somu has to be responsible for the act of Amar committed for Somu’s benefit.Your decision with the reason:- a)(c) (i)
- b)(a) (ii)
- c)(d) (iii)
- d)(b) (iv)
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLES: 1. If A is asked to do something by B, B is responsible for the act, not A.
2. If A, while acting for B commits a wrong, A is responsible for the wrong, not B.
3. If A is authorised to do something for B, but in the name of A without disclosing B’s presence, both A and B may be held liable.
2. If A, while acting for B commits a wrong, A is responsible for the wrong, not B.
3. If A is authorised to do something for B, but in the name of A without disclosing B’s presence, both A and B may be held liable.
FACTS: Somu contracted with Amar whereunder Amar would buy a pumpset to be used in Somu’s farm. Such a pumpset was in short supply in the market. Gulab, a dealer, had such a pumpset and he refused to sell it to Amar. Amar threatened Gulab of serious consequences if he fails to part with the pumpset. Gulab filed a complaint against Amar.
PROPOSED DECISION:
(a) Amar alone is liable for the wrong though he acted for Somu.
(b) Amar is not liable for the wrong, though he is bound by the contract with Somu.
(c) Somu is bound by the contract and liable for the wrong.
(d) Both Somu and Amar are liable for the wrong.
(b) Amar is not liable for the wrong, though he is bound by the contract with Somu.
(c) Somu is bound by the contract and liable for the wrong.
(d) Both Somu and Amar are liable for the wrong.
SUGGESTED REASONS:
(i) Amar committed the wrong while acting for the benefit of Somu.
(ii) Amar cannot do while acting for Somu something which he cannot do while acting for himself.
(iii) Both Amar and Somu are liable since they are bound by the contract.
(iv) Somu has to be responsible for the act of Amar committed for Somu’s benefit.
(ii) Amar cannot do while acting for Somu something which he cannot do while acting for himself.
(iii) Both Amar and Somu are liable since they are bound by the contract.
(iv) Somu has to be responsible for the act of Amar committed for Somu’s benefit.
Your decision with the reason:
a)
(c) (i)
b)
(a) (ii)
c)
(d) (iii)
d)
(b) (iv)
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct option is B.
Amar is sole responsibility and it was on his discretion to avoid such a threat to gulab.
If a newspaper published a defamatory article written by `X’, who can be sued?- a)Publisher of that newspaper
- b)Printer of that newspaper
- c)Mr. X only
- d)Mr. X, Printer, Publisher and Editor
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
If a newspaper published a defamatory article written by `X’, who can be sued?
a)
Publisher of that newspaper
b)
Printer of that newspaper
c)
Mr. X only
d)
Mr. X, Printer, Publisher and Editor
|
Faizan Khan answered |
If the statement is made in writing and published, the defamation is called "libel". If the statement , being hurtful, is spoken, the statement is "slander". In the above situation, the publisher of the newspaper published the defamatory article, hence he has committed libel.
If A$B’ means that ‘A is the father of B’, ‘A*B’ means that ‘A is the mother of B’, ‘A@B’ means that ‘A is the wife of B’, then which of the following means that ‘M is the grandmother of N’?- a)M*R$T@N
- b)M*R@T@N
- c)M*T$N@R
- d)M*T@N$R
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
If A$B’ means that ‘A is the father of B’, ‘A*B’ means that ‘A is the mother of B’, ‘A@B’ means that ‘A is the wife of B’, then which of the following means that ‘M is the grandmother of N’?
a)
M*R$T@N
b)
M*R@T@N
c)
M*T$N@R
d)
M*T@N$R
e)
None of these
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
C is the correct option.It provides us that answer at "M*T$N" part of the question.
it states that M is the mother of T, and T is the father of N. Thus father's mother is known as grandmother only.
it states that M is the mother of T, and T is the father of N. Thus father's mother is known as grandmother only.
Practice Quiz or MCQ (Multiple Choice Questions) with solutions are available for Practice, which would help you prepare for chapter Squares and Square Roots, Class 8, Mathematics . You can practice these practice quizzes as per your speed and improvise the topic.Q.Which of the following is a perfect square number?- a)222222
- b)23453
- c)1681
- d)1057
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Practice Quiz or MCQ (Multiple Choice Questions) with solutions are available for Practice, which would help you prepare for chapter Squares and Square Roots, Class 8, Mathematics . You can practice these practice quizzes as per your speed and improvise the topic.
Q.
Which of the following is a perfect square number?
a)
222222
b)
23453
c)
1681
d)
1057
|
Kavya Saxena answered |
The answer is 1681 because it is the only number which has it's last digit as a number which a perfect square can have . 9×9=81 the last digit is 1.
Principle: If a professional doesn’t take care like an ordinary prudent person, he is guilty of negligence and shall have to pay compensation to those who suffer.Fact: Kapoor, a businessman appointed a surgeon Dr. K.S. Pratap for completing surgery to remove deformation in the leg of his son, Amit. During the surgery an attendant nurse left a small needle inside, which resulted in a serious abyss requiring second operation. After the second operation, leg was shortened. Has the doctor committed any wrong?- a)No, he has not committed any wrong; it was the nurse who was negligent.
- b)No, he has not committed any wrong; as such lapses are common in surgeries.
- c)Yes, the doctor is guilty of medical negligence, as there is absence of due care
- d)Yes, both the doctor as well as the nurse is liable
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle: If a professional doesn’t take care like an ordinary prudent person, he is guilty of negligence and shall have to pay compensation to those who suffer.
Fact: Kapoor, a businessman appointed a surgeon Dr. K.S. Pratap for completing surgery to remove deformation in the leg of his son, Amit. During the surgery an attendant nurse left a small needle inside, which resulted in a serious abyss requiring second operation. After the second operation, leg was shortened. Has the doctor committed any wrong?
a)
No, he has not committed any wrong; it was the nurse who was negligent.
b)
No, he has not committed any wrong; as such lapses are common in surgeries.
c)
Yes, the doctor is guilty of medical negligence, as there is absence of due care
d)
Yes, both the doctor as well as the nurse is liable
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
The nurse works under the duty of the doctor So for the negligence of the nurse, Doctor will be HELD VICARIOUSLY liable.
Assertion (A) When right of a private individual has been infringed by other individual, it is called tort.Reason (R) When right of public at large has been infringed it is called crime.- a)Both A and R are true but R is not correct explanation of A
- b)Both A and R are true and R is correct explanation of A
- c)Both A and R are false
- d)A is true R is false
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Assertion (A) When right of a private individual has been infringed by other individual, it is called tort.
Reason (R) When right of public at large has been infringed it is called crime.
a)
Both A and R are true but R is not correct explanation of A
b)
Both A and R are true and R is correct explanation of A
c)
Both A and R are false
d)
A is true R is false
|
Shivangi dasgupta answered |
Explanation:
• Tort is a civil wrong that results in loss or harm to an individual or property. It is an infringement of a person's private rights, i.e. rights that are not owed to the public at large but to a specific individual or group of individuals.
• Crime, on the other hand, is a public wrong that results in harm to the society as a whole. It is an infringement of a person's public rights, i.e. rights that are owed to the public at large.
• Therefore, the assertion (A) is true as tort is indeed an infringement of a private individual's right.
• However, the reason (R) is not a correct explanation of A as it talks about a different concept altogether, i.e. crime. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.
• Tort is a civil wrong that results in loss or harm to an individual or property. It is an infringement of a person's private rights, i.e. rights that are not owed to the public at large but to a specific individual or group of individuals.
• Crime, on the other hand, is a public wrong that results in harm to the society as a whole. It is an infringement of a person's public rights, i.e. rights that are owed to the public at large.
• Therefore, the assertion (A) is true as tort is indeed an infringement of a private individual's right.
• However, the reason (R) is not a correct explanation of A as it talks about a different concept altogether, i.e. crime. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.
PRINCIPLE: An employer is liable for the negligence of his employee. But an employer is not liable for the negligence of his employee, if the victim of such negligence is one of his other employees.FACTS: A and B were working in factory as unskilled labourers. A was carrying a basket of stones on his head. B was sitting on the ground. When A crossed B, all of a sudden a stone fell down from the basket and hit B on his head. B died immediately.- a)The owner of the factory will be liable.
- b)A and the owner of the factory shall be jointly liable.
- c)The owner of the factory will not be liable.
- d)None of the above.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLE: An employer is liable for the negligence of his employee. But an employer is not liable for the negligence of his employee, if the victim of such negligence is one of his other employees.
FACTS: A and B were working in factory as unskilled labourers. A was carrying a basket of stones on his head. B was sitting on the ground. When A crossed B, all of a sudden a stone fell down from the basket and hit B on his head. B died immediately.
a)
The owner of the factory will be liable.
b)
A and the owner of the factory shall be jointly liable.
c)
The owner of the factory will not be liable.
d)
None of the above.
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
Explanation:
The correct answer is C: The owner of the factory will not be liable.
Reasoning:
- According to the principle, an employer is liable for the negligence of his employee. In this case, A was the employee who was negligent by allowing the stone to fall from the basket.
- However, the principle also states that an employer is not liable for the negligence of his employee if the victim of such negligence is one of his other employees. In this case, B was also an employee of the factory.
- Since B was an employee of the factory, the owner of the factory will not be liable for the negligence of A that led to B's death.
Therefore, the owner of the factory will not be liable for the negligence of A that caused the death of B.
Principle: A master is liable for the acts committed by his servant in the course of employment.Fact: “A” instructs his driver “B” to drive his vehicle from the office back to home. He is also instructed not to carry any unauthorized person in the car. “B” one day while driving empty car back to home picks up his friend, “C”, who stays close to A’s house. In thecourse of driving the car towards A’s house, he collides with a vehicle.”C” is injured in the accident. Is A liable to compensate to C?- a)A shall be liable, because B was in the course of employment at the time of accident
- b)A shall not be liable, B was not in the course of employment when he took C inside the car.
- c)C got into the car at his own risk, and therefore, he cannot sue anybody.
- d)A shall not be liable, as he had instructed B not to give lift to unauthorized persons.
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle: A master is liable for the acts committed by his servant in the course of employment.
Fact: “A” instructs his driver “B” to drive his vehicle from the office back to home. He is also instructed not to carry any unauthorized person in the car. “B” one day while driving empty car back to home picks up his friend, “C”, who stays close to A’s house. In the
course of driving the car towards A’s house, he collides with a vehicle.”C” is injured in the accident. Is A liable to compensate to C?
a)
A shall be liable, because B was in the course of employment at the time of accident
b)
A shall not be liable, B was not in the course of employment when he took C inside the car.
c)
C got into the car at his own risk, and therefore, he cannot sue anybody.
d)
A shall not be liable, as he had instructed B not to give lift to unauthorized persons.
|
Megha Patel answered |
As while driving he was in the course of action it no matter whether master expressly prohibited his servant or not be have to check that only whether the person is in course of employment or not
How many numbers lie between square of 12 and 13- a)22
- b)23
- c)24
- d)25
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
How many numbers lie between square of 12 and 13
a)
22
b)
23
c)
24
d)
25
|
Rhea Reddy answered |
122 = 12*12 = 144
132 = 13*13 = 169
Now numbers are between144 and 169 are:
145, 146, 147,.............168
Total number = 24
So total numbers lies between 144 and 169 is 24
To have an axe to grind- a)A private end to serve
- b)To fail to arouse interest
- c)To have no result
- d)To work for both sides
- e)none of these
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
To have an axe to grind
a)
A private end to serve
b)
To fail to arouse interest
c)
To have no result
d)
To work for both sides
e)
none of these
|
|
Meera Rana answered |
The idiom 'to have an axe to grind' means to have a private reason for doing or being involved in something.
P is the sister of I, Q is married to M, E is grandmother of F. - K is the father of A, Q is married to only brother of K
- P has only two children one is daughter and one is son
- H is granddaughter of N, who is father of I, A’s maternal uncle has only one child F
- G and A are cousin
Q.
How is H related to G?- a)Brother
- b)Cousin
- c)Sister
- d)Father
- e)Daughter in law
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
P is the sister of I, Q is married to M, E is grandmother of F.
- K is the father of A, Q is married to only brother of K
- P has only two children one is daughter and one is son
- H is granddaughter of N, who is father of I, A’s maternal uncle has only one child F
- G and A are cousin
Q.
How is H related to G?
How is H related to G?
a)
Brother
b)
Cousin
c)
Sister
d)
Father
e)
Daughter in law
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
The correct answer is B as From 'Q is married to only brother of K' and Q is married to M' it is clear that M and K are brothers.
2-Now A is K's son and A's maternal uncle has a child F,
also A has another cousin G which is possibly the child of M&Q.
3-N is father of I who has a sister P(possibly married to K) and P has 2 children one being A and the other is H(since I the maternal uncle of A has one child F).
Therfore, H and G are cousin.
2-Now A is K's son and A's maternal uncle has a child F,
also A has another cousin G which is possibly the child of M&Q.
3-N is father of I who has a sister P(possibly married to K) and P has 2 children one being A and the other is H(since I the maternal uncle of A has one child F).
Therfore, H and G are cousin.
The Railway authorities allowed a train to be over-crowded. In consequence, a legitimate passenger, Mr. X got his pocket picked. Choose appropriate answer-- a)Mr. X can sue the railway authorities for the loss suffered.
- b)Mr. X cannot sue because he had given his consent to travel in over-crowded train.
- c)Mr. X cannot sue the railway authorities because there was no infringement of legal right and mere fact that the loss was caused does not give to a cause of action.
- d)None of the above.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
The Railway authorities allowed a train to be over-crowded. In consequence, a legitimate passenger, Mr. X got his pocket picked. Choose appropriate answer-
a)
Mr. X can sue the railway authorities for the loss suffered.
b)
Mr. X cannot sue because he had given his consent to travel in over-crowded train.
c)
Mr. X cannot sue the railway authorities because there was no infringement of legal right and mere fact that the loss was caused does not give to a cause of action.
d)
None of the above.
|
|
Aryan Khanna answered |
Answer: CExplanation:- Mr. X cannot sue the railway authorities because there was no infringement of legal right and mere fact that the loss was caused does not give rise to a cause of action. - The railway authorities may be responsible for allowing the train to be overcrowded, but the act of pocket-picking was committed by a third party, not the railway authorities. - There is no legal duty on the part of the railway authorities to prevent or guarantee against pickpocketing, as it is an unforeseen criminal act. - Mr. X's consent to travel in an overcrowded train does not come into play in this situation, as the issue at hand is the pickpocketing incident.In conclusion, while it is unfortunate that Mr. X had his pocket picked, he cannot sue the railway authorities for the loss suffered as there was no infringement of a legal right by the railway authorities in this case.
PRINCIPLE: A tort-feasor (wrong-doer) is liable if intended consequences of his act are evidently foreseeable.FACTS: Marcus threw an ignited missile into a crowded market place. The fiery missile came down the shed of a vendor of ginger bread who in order to protect himself, caught it dexterously and threw it away from him. It then fell on the shed of another merchant, who in order to protect himself passed it on precisely in the same way, till at last it burst in Brutus’s face and put his eye out. Brutus sued Marcus. Decide.- a)Marcus is not liable as he did not foresee the injury suffered by Brutus.
- b)Marcus is liable as he intentionally threw the missile into the market place.
- c)Marcus is not liable as it was the merchant who ultimately threw the missile on Brutus.
- d)Marcus is not liable as the injury suffered by Brutus is of a remote consequence.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLE: A tort-feasor (wrong-doer) is liable if intended consequences of his act are evidently foreseeable.
FACTS: Marcus threw an ignited missile into a crowded market place. The fiery missile came down the shed of a vendor of ginger bread who in order to protect himself, caught it dexterously and threw it away from him. It then fell on the shed of another merchant, who in order to protect himself passed it on precisely in the same way, till at last it burst in Brutus’s face and put his eye out. Brutus sued Marcus. Decide.
a)
Marcus is not liable as he did not foresee the injury suffered by Brutus.
b)
Marcus is liable as he intentionally threw the missile into the market place.
c)
Marcus is not liable as it was the merchant who ultimately threw the missile on Brutus.
d)
Marcus is not liable as the injury suffered by Brutus is of a remote consequence.
|
|
Cibin Cibi answered |
Here, Marcus throws the ignited missile wantedly into the crowd as in the other cases it is given that the other shopkeepers did it to save themselves so Marcus is liable for his act.
PRINCIPLE: A person has no legal remedy for an injury caused by an act to which he has consented.FACTS: R, a cricket enthusiast, purchases a ticket to watch a T20 match organized by the Indian Premier League (IPL). During the match, a ball struck for six hits R on his body and injures him. He sues IPL for compensation for the medical expenses. Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?- a)R should be compensated as he purchased the ticket to get entertainment and not get injured.
- b)R would fail in his action, as he voluntarily exposed himself to the risk.
- c)IPL would be liable as it did not ensure that the spectators were protected from the risk of such injuries.
- d)None of the above.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLE: A person has no legal remedy for an injury caused by an act to which he has consented.
FACTS: R, a cricket enthusiast, purchases a ticket to watch a T20 match organized by the Indian Premier League (IPL). During the match, a ball struck for six hits R on his body and injures him. He sues IPL for compensation for the medical expenses. Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?
a)
R should be compensated as he purchased the ticket to get entertainment and not get injured.
b)
R would fail in his action, as he voluntarily exposed himself to the risk.
c)
IPL would be liable as it did not ensure that the spectators were protected from the risk of such injuries.
d)
None of the above.
|
|
Sajal Bdw answered |
The correct answer will be B because by buying ticket of IPL R has given the consent of any risk
PRINCIPLE: A master is liable for the acts committed by his servant in the course of employment.FACTS: Sanjay is a driver working in Brooke bond and co. one day, the Manager asked him to drop a customer at the airport and get back at the earliest. On his way back from the airport, he happened to see his fiancé Ruhina waiting for a bus to go home. He offered to drop her at home, which happened to be close to his office. She got into the car and soon thereafter; the car somersaulted due to the negligence to Sanjay. Ruhina was thrown out of the car suffered multiple injuries. She seeks compensation from Brooke bond and Co.- a)Brooke bond and Co. shall be liable, because Sanjay was in the course of employment at the time of accident.
- b)Brooke bond and Co. Shall not be liable, Sanjay was not in the course of employment when he took Ruhina inside the car.
- c)Ruhina got into the car at her own risk, and therefore, she cannot sue anybody.
- d)None of the above
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLE: A master is liable for the acts committed by his servant in the course of employment.
FACTS: Sanjay is a driver working in Brooke bond and co. one day, the Manager asked him to drop a customer at the airport and get back at the earliest. On his way back from the airport, he happened to see his fiancé Ruhina waiting for a bus to go home. He offered to drop her at home, which happened to be close to his office. She got into the car and soon thereafter; the car somersaulted due to the negligence to Sanjay. Ruhina was thrown out of the car suffered multiple injuries. She seeks compensation from Brooke bond and Co.
a)
Brooke bond and Co. shall be liable, because Sanjay was in the course of employment at the time of accident.
b)
Brooke bond and Co. Shall not be liable, Sanjay was not in the course of employment when he took Ruhina inside the car.
c)
Ruhina got into the car at her own risk, and therefore, she cannot sue anybody.
d)
None of the above
|
Mrunalini Vengurlekar answered |
Sanjay was coming back from doing a task given to him by his employer, and reporting back to his office was part of the task. So, whatever he does during the time we established as his course of employment, the company is liable for.
A pipe dream.His idea to make a movie was "a mere pipe dream".- a)a great idea
- b)a foolish idea
- c)an extravagant idea
- d)an impractical plan
- e)none of these
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
A pipe dream.
His idea to make a movie was "a mere pipe dream".
a)
a great idea
b)
a foolish idea
c)
an extravagant idea
d)
an impractical plan
e)
none of these
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
A pipe dream is an idiom that means an idea or plan that is impossible or very unlikely to happen:
To drive homea) To find one's roots b) To return to place of rest c)Back to original positiond) To emphasise e)none of theseCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
|
|
Meera Rana answered |
To drive home: give special importance or value to
Direction: Spot the grammatical errors in the given sentence. Mark the part with error as your answer. If there is no error, mark "No error" as the answer. (Ignore punctuation error)Everyone is keen in knowing (a)/ the forecast for the monsoon (b)/ this year as it has been the (c)/ major cause of inflation in Asia. (d)/ No error (e)- a)Everyone is keen in knowing
- b)the forecast for the monsoon
- c)this year as it has been the
- d)major cause of inflation in asia
- e)No error
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
Direction: Spot the grammatical errors in the given sentence. Mark the part with error as your answer. If there is no error, mark "No error" as the answer. (Ignore punctuation error)
Everyone is keen in knowing (a)/ the forecast for the monsoon (b)/ this year as it has been the (c)/ major cause of inflation in Asia. (d)/ No error (e)
a)
Everyone is keen in knowing
b)
the forecast for the monsoon
c)
this year as it has been the
d)
major cause of inflation in asia
e)
No error
|
EduRev GMAT answered |
In Part A, the use of word 'keen in knowing' should be replaced by 'keen to know'to make the sentence correct
Correction: Everyone is keen to know
Hence option A is correct.
Principle: No one is responsible for unforeseen circumstances, but liable for not taking due care.Fact: Rahul, aged about 19 years, was playing cricket with his friends in housing societies lane where they live. While playing he made a good shot, which hit a window of a new Maruti car and broke the window. Has Rahul to pay for?- a)No, Rahul is not responsible, as it is common for boys to play street cricket.
- b)Yes, Rahul is liable, as breaking window is a predictable consequence of playing cricket on streets.
- c)Yes, Rahul is liable, as he hit the shot which broke the window.
- d)No, All the boys are liable to pay, not just Rahul.
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Principle: No one is responsible for unforeseen circumstances, but liable for not taking due care.
Fact: Rahul, aged about 19 years, was playing cricket with his friends in housing societies lane where they live. While playing he made a good shot, which hit a window of a new Maruti car and broke the window. Has Rahul to pay for?
a)
No, Rahul is not responsible, as it is common for boys to play street cricket.
b)
Yes, Rahul is liable, as breaking window is a predictable consequence of playing cricket on streets.
c)
Yes, Rahul is liable, as he hit the shot which broke the window.
d)
No, All the boys are liable to pay, not just Rahul.
|
|
Dia Mehta answered |
The correct option is B.
The owner of the car can sue rahul through his father for damages. The case will be registered in the name of Rahul but the ultimate compensation will be paid by Rahul's father.
The owner of the car can sue rahul through his father for damages. The case will be registered in the name of Rahul but the ultimate compensation will be paid by Rahul's father.
PRINCIPLE: Ignorance of Fact is excused but ignorance of law is no excuseFACTS: X was a passenger from Zurich to Manila in a Swiss Plane. When the plane landed at the Airport of Bombay on 28 Nov. 1962 it was found on searching that X carried 34 kg of Gold Bars on his person and that he had not declared it in the ‘Manifest for Transit’. On 26th Nov. 1962 the Government of India had issued a notification modifying its earlier exemption, making it mandatory now that the gold must be declared in the “Manifest” of the aircraft.- a)X cannot be prosecuted because he had actually no knowledge about the new notification issued two days ago
- b)X cannot be prosecuted because ignorance of fact is excusable
- c)X can be prosecuted because ignorance of law is not excusable
- d)X’s liability would depend on the discretion of the court
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
PRINCIPLE: Ignorance of Fact is excused but ignorance of law is no excuse
FACTS: X was a passenger from Zurich to Manila in a Swiss Plane. When the plane landed at the Airport of Bombay on 28 Nov. 1962 it was found on searching that X carried 34 kg of Gold Bars on his person and that he had not declared it in the ‘Manifest for Transit’. On 26th Nov. 1962 the Government of India had issued a notification modifying its earlier exemption, making it mandatory now that the gold must be declared in the “Manifest” of the aircraft.
a)
X cannot be prosecuted because he had actually no knowledge about the new notification issued two days ago
b)
X cannot be prosecuted because ignorance of fact is excusable
c)
X can be prosecuted because ignorance of law is not excusable
d)
X’s liability would depend on the discretion of the court
|
|
Nishtha Pandey answered |
On 26 nov 1962=GOI notified all that it's mandatory that the gold must be declared in the manifest of aircraft.
On 28 nov 1962=Plane landed at the Bombay airport where X is carrying 34 kg of gold bars.
even two days after declaration, X had gold bars with him & no information received by the aircraft authority.
So, here X can be prosecuted becuz ignorance of law is not excusable.
hope it helps!!!
On 28 nov 1962=Plane landed at the Bombay airport where X is carrying 34 kg of gold bars.
even two days after declaration, X had gold bars with him & no information received by the aircraft authority.
So, here X can be prosecuted becuz ignorance of law is not excusable.
hope it helps!!!
Study the following informations carefully to answer these questions. (i) ‘P * Q’ means ‘P is father of Q’. (ii) ‘P # Q’ means ‘P is sister of Q’. (iii) ‘P + Q’ means ‘P is brother of Q’. (iv) ‘P – Q’ means ‘P is mother of Q’. (v) ‘P/Q’ means ‘P is son of Q’. (vi) ‘P = Q’ means ‘P is daughter of Q’.Q.
Which of the following means ‘Z has two children’?- a)Z + Y + X
- b)Z * Y # X
- c)Z # Y – X
- d)Z + X/Y
- e)None of these
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Study the following informations carefully to answer these questions.
(i) ‘P * Q’ means ‘P is father of Q’.
(ii) ‘P # Q’ means ‘P is sister of Q’.
(iii) ‘P + Q’ means ‘P is brother of Q’.
(iv) ‘P – Q’ means ‘P is mother of Q’.
(v) ‘P/Q’ means ‘P is son of Q’.
(vi) ‘P = Q’ means ‘P is daughter of Q’.
Q.
Which of the following means ‘Z has two children’?
Which of the following means ‘Z has two children’?
a)
Z + Y + X
b)
Z * Y # X
c)
Z # Y – X
d)
Z + X/Y
e)
None of these
|
Khushi Mishra answered |
In second option we can easily say that y and x are brother and sister because there is a # (has tag) in middle of both and IN between Z and Y there is * so it means Z is father of x and y
A laughing stock.With his flimsy story, he made "a laughing stock" of himself.- a)look ridiculous
- b)foolish
- c)laughed too much
- d)storage of laughter
- e)none of these
Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?
A laughing stock.
With his flimsy story, he made "a laughing stock" of himself.
a)
look ridiculous
b)
foolish
c)
laughed too much
d)
storage of laughter
e)
none of these
|
|
Anaya Patel answered |
Laughing stock means when someone or something that seems stupid or silly, especially by trying to be serious or important and not succeeding.
Example-
If you say that a person or an organization has become a laughing stock, you mean that they are supposed to be important or serious but have been made to seem ridiculous.
Example-
If you say that a person or an organization has become a laughing stock, you mean that they are supposed to be important or serious but have been made to seem ridiculous.
Chapter doubts & questions for Week 5 - Weekly Test for CLAT UG 2025 is part of CLAT exam preparation. The chapters have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. The Chapter doubts & questions, notes, tests & MCQs are made for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, notes, meanings, examples, exercises, MCQs and online tests here.
Chapter doubts & questions of Week 5 - Weekly Test for CLAT UG in English & Hindi are available as part of CLAT exam.
Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Weekly Test for CLAT UG
3 docs|141 tests
|
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup on EduRev and stay on top of your study goals
10M+ students crushing their study goals daily