Test: Law Of Tort - 6

50 Questions MCQ Test Additional Documents & Tests for CLAT | Test: Law Of Tort - 6

This mock test of Test: Law Of Tort - 6 for CLAT helps you for every CLAT entrance exam. This contains 50 Multiple Choice Questions for CLAT Test: Law Of Tort - 6 (mcq) to study with solutions a complete question bank. The solved questions answers in this Test: Law Of Tort - 6 quiz give you a good mix of easy questions and tough questions. CLAT students definitely take this Test: Law Of Tort - 6 exercise for a better result in the exam. You can find other Test: Law Of Tort - 6 extra questions, long questions & short questions for CLAT on EduRev as well by searching above.

‘X’ with a view to murdering ‘Y’ enters ‘Y’ bedroom at night when ‘Y’ is out of station. What is ‘X’ guilty of?


So X is guilty of trespassing.


Legal principle: whoever uses force without any lawful justification is deemed to commit battery

Facts: Mary and Maya have an argument over an issue in the classroom. In order to take revenge over this Mary tries to humiliate maya in front of the other classmates by pulling the chair the moment she is about to sit on the chair. Though maya falls, she is not hurt. However she files a case against mary for battery.

Q. Is mary liable?


The correct option is D.
Battery is referred to as an intentional tort involving unwanted physical contact, that may or may not cause physical harm.  The four essential requirements: 
(1) Intent: the person accused of committing the act must have intended to cause some unwanted contact and not necessarily the harm that has been caused. 
(2) Contact: It refers to a non-consensual contact that is made with the victim or to the victim's extended personality i.e. on any property on the body of the victim. 
(3) Harm: It is not necessary to prove any actual physical injury. Rather the plaintiff must prove an unpermitted contact in a harmful or offensive manner. 
(4) Damages: it includes physical, emotional or monetary harm. 
In the present instance, all these instances have been proved against Mary.


Legal Principle: A person is entitled to use reasonable force for self defence.

Facts: Gokul was living in a farm house with a few family members. One night, a group of robbers broke open a door of the house and there was scuffle b/w the intruders and the residents. Gokul took out his pistol and fired a shot at one of the intruders. The shot did not hit the target and the robbers ran out of the house and by that time, the neighbors gathered in front of the house. Gokul in a fit of anger came out of the house and fired at fleeing robbers who by that time mingled with the neighbors. The shot injured a neighbor and he filed a suit against Gokul.


Legal principle: A master will be liable for the wrongful acts of his servants in the course of employment

Facts: Mahesh was working as a driver in a company Lipton & 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 Roopa 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 somersaulted due to the negligence of Mahesh. Roopa was thrown out of the car and suffered multiple injuries. She seeks compensation from Lipton & Co.


The correct option is B

Vicarious liability can be defined as a legal doctrine that assigns liability for an injury to a person who did not cause the injury who has a particular relationship to the person who did act negligently. It can also be called imputed negligence. This doctrine arises under the common law doctrine of agency, respondeat superior, the responsibility of the superior for the acts of their subordinate or, in a broader sense, the responsibility of any third party that had the "right, ability or duty to control" the activities of a violator.  Hence, in the above situation, since the act was not committed in the course of employment, Roopa will not succeed.


Legal principle: An unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment of land or some right over or in connection with it is a nuisance in tort.

Facts: Mr. Prasad filed suit against Mr. Shyam for a permanent injunction to restrain him from installing and running flour mill in their premises. According to Mr. Prasad, it created nuisance to them as they were put on the first floor of the same premises.

Q. Will his action succeed?


The correct option is A.
It is clear from the case below.
Case Law: Radhey Shyam v. Gur Prasad AIR 1978 All 86
Mr Gur Prasad Saxena and another filed a suit against Mr Radhey Shyam and five other individuals for permanent injunction restraining the defendant from installing and running a flour mill in the premises occupied by the defendant. Gur Prasad Saxena filed another suit against Radhey Shyam and five other individuals for a permanent injunction from running and continuing to run an oil expeller plant. The plaintiff has alleged that the mill was causing a lot of noise which in turn was affecting the health of the plaintiff. It was held that by running a flour mill in a residential area, the defendant was causing a nuisance to the plaintiff and affecting his health severely.


Complete the sentence:To constitute trespass actual damage is………………………..


In an action for trespass, burden to prove justification is on the…………………….


X actually beats B with a stick. He has committed the offence of………………….


A throws water on B and the drop of the water falls on B. A committed


Vicarious liability is based on which of the following principle?


Respondent superior means


In which of the following cases, ‘P’ did not owe duty of care to ‘Q’.


Q took the risk to travel on the roof of the bus and owner's liability limits to seats available in the bus.


A is running a polyclinic well-equipped with operation theaters and supporting staff. S is a surgeon who makes use of this polyclinic to operate his patients. While operating a patient P, due to the negligence of nurse N (Who was a support staff of polyclinic), the surgical knife was left inside the abdomen of P. As a result, P developed several complications. Advise P as to against whom, i.e., A or S, he should file the suit for damages.


Legal Principle:

1. Whoever is under a duty of care to another shall be liable for any injury to the latter directly resulting from the breach of that duty.

2. Harm suffered voluntarily does not constitute legal injury.

Factual Situation: Gupta Confectioners sent certain items in a horse carriage to a customer's house, which happened to be by the side of a main road and near a school zone. The driver of the carriage delivered the items to the customers and went inside the house to collect the receipt, leaving the carriage unattended on tile road. Some naughty children nearby threw stones at the horses. The horses ran over confusion and were about to run over an old woman. A traffic police, at great risk to his life, somehow seized the horses and stopped the carriage. He suffered serious personal injuries in the process. The policemen seeks compensation from Gupta Confectioners.


Legal Principles:

1. Negligence is the omission to do some-thing, which a reasonable man would do, breach of which, if it causes damage, makes one liable to the person who suffered loss.

2. One owes a duty of care to another, if a responsible man can foresee that he will be affected by the breach of duty.

3. One is not liable if the injured party volunteers to take the risk.

Factual Situation: A cricket match is being held in a stadium. Akshit, being unable to afford the ticket price, is viewing the cricket match sitting atop a branch of a nearby tree. When a batsman hits a ball over the boundary, the ball in turn hits Akshit and sustains injury on his spinal cord due to fall from the tree.


Principle Trespass to land means direct interference with the possession of land without lawful justification. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another person or doing the same through some tangible object (s).

Facts ‘A’ throws some stones upon his neighbor’s (B’s) premises


Principle: Nuisance is an unlawful interference with a person’s use or enjoyment with it, if the interference is connection wrong is trespass; whereas, if the interference is ‘consequential’, it amounts to nuisance.

Facts ‘A’ plants a tree on his land. However, he allows its branches to project over the land of ‘B’.


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

Facts : ‘R’ went to a cycle-stand to park his bicycle. Seeing the stand fully occupied, he removed a few bicycles in order to rearrange a portion of the stand and make some space for his bicycle. He parked his bicycle properly, and put back all the bicycles except the one belonging to ‘S’, In fact, ‘R’ was in a hurry and therefore, he could not put back S’s bicycle somebody come on the way and took away S’s bicycle. The watchmen of the stand did not take care of it assuming that the bicycle was to parked inside the stand. ‘S’ filed a suit against ‘R’ for conversion.


Assertion (A): In the event of violation of any legal right (tort) the aggrieved party is entitled to recover unliquidated damages.

Reason (R): The object of awarding damages to the aggrieved party is to put him in the same position in which he would have been if the wrong would not have been committed. Damages are, therefore, assessed on that basis.


Assertion (A): The Constitution of India provides for the appointment of a Governor for a period of five years.

Reason (R): The Governor holds office during the pleasure of the President.


The correct option is A.

 Subject to the foregoing provisions of this article, a Governor shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office: Provided that a Governor shall, notwithstanding the expiration of his term, continue to hold office until his successor enters upon his office.


Which of the following acts invite tortuous liability and is not saved by the doctrine "volenti non fit injuria"?


In tort, the remedy is:


A person is said to be vicariously liable when:


Principle: A master shall be responsible for the wrongful acts of his servants in the course of his employment.

Facts: The Syndicate Bank was running a small savings scheme under which its authorized agents would go round and collect small savings from several people on a daily basis. These agents would get commission, on the deposits so collected. Ananth was one such agent, collecting deposits from factory workers engaged on daily wages. Though he regularly carried on his business for some time, slowly he started appropriating deposits for his personal use and one day he just disappeared. One Fatima, who had been handing over her savings to him found that nearly for a month before his disappearance, he was not depositing her savings at all. The bank, when approached, took the stand that Ananth was not its regular and paid employee and, therefore, it was not responsible for his misconduct. She filed a suit against the bank.


Principle: A person is liable for all the injuries caused on account of consequences of his careless act.

Facts: Ram, a snake charmer, was exhibiting his talents to a group of people. One of the snakes escaped and bit a child who had to be hospitalized for two days for treatment.


The maxim damnum sine injuria means


To succeed in an action for the tort of negligence, what is required to be proved is


Libel is addressed to the eye, slander to the ear. State which of the following statements amount to libel


Libel and slander are two types of defamation i.e. false communication regarding someone's reputation. Libel is publication against someone's reputation and can be in the form of photos, videos, cartoons, films, CDs etc and hence is said to be addressed to the eye. On the other hand slander is a statement in a temporary form and can take the form of spoken words or even gestures and therefore is said to be addressed to the ears. Hence, the answer is abuses recorded in the gramophone disc.


In a claim for malicious prosecution damages can be claimed on the account of


A patient is brought to a hospital maintained by B. The patient is to be operated upon. If as a result of faulty oxygen supply machine, the patient dies on the operation table, then:


Which of the following correctly identifies the remedies available to the victim in case of false imprisonment?


C is the correct option. There are three remedies for false imprisonment. They are damages, habeas corpus and self help. Being a tort, the basic remedy for false imprisonment is an action for damages which can be due to physical or mental suffering, loss of reputation or even malicious intent on behalf of the defendant.


X along with other passengers hired a bus owned by Y and driven by his driver Z. in the mid-way, the bus was punctured. So Y transferred X and other passengers to another bus owned by L, and driven by his servant R. The second bus met with an accident, in which X died and some other passengers were injured. W, X widow, sued for her husband death. In this case which one of the following is correct?


Option C is correct 
Because the master of the servant is liable for the act of his servant in the course of employment 
Here, R is the servant and L is the master.


The last opportunity principle is related to the


In which one of the following situations A will be liable for defamation? A writes a letter containing a defamatory matter about B and


The correct option is C.
A will be liable only when the person who he is defaming or any other person related to the person who is being defamed reads the letter.


When a master A has lent only the labour of his servant to another master B, who of the following is/are liable for the wrongful acts of the servant?


The correct option is A.
According to the principle of vicarious liability under law of torts, the real master is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts of the servant, unless and until there is an express contract contrary to it.The correct option is A.
According to the principle of vicarious liability under law of torts, the real master is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts of the servant, unless and until there is an express contract contrary to it.


Principle: A person is entitled to protect his property by using lawful means.

Facts: Ramlal is growing valuable vegetables and fruits in his farm and he has fenced the farm to prevent the cattle from entering into it. In addition he has kept a ferocious dog to chase away intruding urchins and cattles. Some children were playing in a nearby playground and the ball slipped into the farm. A boy running after the ball came near the fence and shouted for the ball. When there was no response, he managed to creep into the farm to get the ball. The dog which was surreptitiously waiting attacked the boy and badly mauled him. The boy's parents filed a suit against Ramlal.


Principle: `Volenti non fit injuria', a well-established legal principle, means that a person has no legal remedy for the injury caused by an act which he has consented.

Situation: An old man was walking in a narrow one-way lane in the opposite direction. It was night-time and there was no street lighting. A car moving in right direction but without headlights knocked him down since the driver could not see him. He filed a suit against the driver.


Legal Principle: Volenti non fit injuria means a person has no remedy against an injury caused by an act to which he has consented.

Situation: Ravi was in a hurry to get to the airport to catch the plane and he hired a taxi run by Sekhon Taxi Stand, well known in that locality. Ravi asked the driver to drive fast. In the city zone, there was a speed limit of 60 km per hours and the driver, rather reluctantly, drove quite fast at times 90 km per hour to reach the airport in time. As a result, the driver lost control and hit an obstacle and Ravi was badly injured. Ravi filed a suit against the taxi stand.


Principle: Every person has a right to defend his own person, property or possession against an immediate harm, and to that end, may use reasonable amount of force.

Situation: Mr Rajesh was passing by Mrs Saxena's house. At that time, Mrs Saxena's dog ran out and bit Mr Rajesh's overcoat. Mr Rajesh turned around and raised the pistol at shot at the dog when the dog was running away. Mr Rajesh. knew that the dog had attacked so many other people in that locality of Jammu.

Mrs Saxena claims that her dog was of a rare breed and it was worth Rs. 5000. She is planning to bring a legal action against Mr Rajesh for compensation.


Ramu applied for the post of Director in an organization. The governing body of the organization passed a resolution appointing him to the post. After the meeting, one of the members of the governing body informed him privately of the resolution. Subsequently, the resolution was rescinded. Ramu claims damages. Which one of the following is the correct legal proposition in the case?


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.


PRINCIPLES: (1) Consumable goods which are not fit for consumption are not marketable.
(2) A consumer shall not suffer on account of unmarketable goods.
(3) A seller is liable for knowingly selling unmarketable goods.
(4) A manufacturer shall be liable for the quality of his products.

FACTS: Ram bought a Coca Cola bottle from Shama’s shop. Back at home, the server opened the bottle and poured the drink into the glasses of Ram and his friend Tom. As Tom started drinking, he felt irritation in his throat. Immediately, Ram and Tom took the sample to test and found nitric acid in the content. Ram filed a suit against Shama, Coca Cola company and the bottler, Kishan and Co.


(a)  Ram cannot get compensation
(b) Tom can get compensation
(c)  Both Ram and Tom can get compensation


(i) Shama did not know the contents of sealed bottle.
(ii) Ram did not actually suffer though he bought the bottle.
(iii) Tom did not buy the bottle.
(iv) Coca Cola company is responsible since it supplied the concentrate.
(v) Kishen & Co, is responsible since it added water, sugar, etc., and sealed the bottle.
(vi) Shama is responsible for selling the defective product.

Your decision with the reason:


Here, Ram and Tom are affected by a breach of duty on part of the bottler and manufacturer. Option A is incorrect because it does not matter who drank the contents of the bottle. Both are the neighbours in this case. And there was negligence and hence liability.


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.


(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.


(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:


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.


(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.


(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:


PRINCIPLES: 1. A master shall be liable for the fraudulent acts of his servants committed in the course of employment.
2. Whether an act is committed in the course of employment has to be judged in the context of the case.
3. Both master and third parties must exercise reasonable care in this regard.

FACTS: Rama Bhai was an uneducated widow and she opened an S.B. account with Syndicate Bank with the help of her nephew by name Keshav who was at that time working as a clerk in the Bank. Keshav used to deposit the money of Rama Bhai from time to time and get the entries done in the passbook. After a year or so, Keshav was dismissed from the service by the Bank. Being unaware of this fact, Rama Bhai continued to hand over her savings to him and Keshav misappropriated them. Rama Bhai realised this only when Keshav disappeared from the scene one day, and she sought compensation from the Bank.


(a) Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Rama Bhai.
(b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Rama Bhai.
(c) Rama Bhai cannot blame others for her negligence.


(i) Keshav was not an employee of the Bank when the fraud was committed.
(ii) The Bank was not aware of the special arrangement between Rama Bhai and Keshav
(iii) It is the Bank’s duty to take care of vulnerable customers.
(iv) Rama Bhai should have checked about Keshav in her own interest.

Your decision with the reason:


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.


(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.


(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:


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.


(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.


(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:


B throws water on C with the intention of getting him wet. The action is


The purpose behind the punishments given under the law of tort is not


The main aim of tort is said to be compensation for harm suffered as a result of the breach of a duty fixed by law. Tort seems to place greater emphasis on wrongs of commission rather than wrongs of omission. Another important aim of tort is to deter behaviour which is likely to cause harm.


The term ‘Scienter’ is related to which one of the following sign boards


Similar Content

Related tests