Test: Law Of Tort - 7

50 Questions MCQ Test Additional Documents & Tests for CLAT | Test: Law Of Tort - 7

This mock test of Test: Law Of Tort - 7 for CLAT helps you for every CLAT entrance exam. This contains 50 Multiple Choice Questions for CLAT Test: Law Of Tort - 7 (mcq) to study with solutions a complete question bank. The solved questions answers in this Test: Law Of Tort - 7 quiz give you a good mix of easy questions and tough questions. CLAT students definitely take this Test: Law Of Tort - 7 exercise for a better result in the exam. You can find other Test: Law Of Tort - 7 extra questions, long questions & short questions for CLAT on EduRev as well by searching above.

Assertion A. Contributory negligence in an accident is a defense to a charge in criminal law.
Reason R. The fact that the deceased was also negligent and contributed to the accident does not afford a defense to the driver.


D is the correct option. A is false, but R is true because Contributory negligence is not a defence in Criminal law it is a defence in torts.


X, the owner of a car, asked his friend Y to drive the car to his office. As the car was near his (X’s) office, it hit a pedestrian P on account of Y’s negligent driving and injured him seriously. P sued X for damages. Which one of the following is correct regarding the above?


The standard of care generally used in cases of negligence is the


Two persons are said to be joint tort-feasors when


Match List-I with List II and select the correct answer using the code given below the lists:
List-I List-II


For an action of nuisance, the following have been put up as defenses
1. The place is suitable for the purpose.
2. It is for the benefit of the locality.
3. It is done under statutory authority?

Which of the defenses given above is/are correct?


Which one of the following elements is not necessary to have a private right of action in respect of a public nuisance?


Which of the following remedies are available in an action in the tort of nuisance?
1. Abatement
2. Injunction
3. Specific restitution
4. Action for damages
Select the correct answer using the code given below:


Public nuisance is a tort:


A master of a servant is:


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


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: A citizen is expected to take reasonable duty of care while driving on the road and not to cause injuries to any person.

Facts: X, the owner of a car, asked his friend Y to drive the car to his office. As the car was near his (X’s) office, it hit a pedestrian P on account of Y’s negligent driving and injured him seriously. P sued X for damages. Which one of the following is correct?


Principle: Contributory negligence in an accident is a defence for a charge in criminal law. Facts: X, the deceased was negligently crossing the busy road at Connaught Place in Delhi while Y’s car hit him resulting in the death of X. What is the liability of Y?


Principal : Negligence is a breach of duty or a failure of one party to exercise the standard of care required by law, resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. A plaintiff can take civil action against the respondent, if the respondent’s negligence causes the plaintiff injury or loss of property.   

Facts : ‘D’ went to a café and ordered and paid for a tin/can of soft drink.  The tin was opaque and thereof, the contents could not be seen from outside. She (‘D’) consumed some of the contents and then lifted the tin to pour the remainder of the content into a tumbler. The remains of a snail in decomposed state dropped out of the tin into the tumbler. ‘D’ later complained of a stomach pain and her as having gastroenteritis and being in a state of sever shock. She used the manufacturer of the drink for negligence.   

Applying the afore-stated principle, which of the following derivations is correct as regards liability of the manufacturer in the given situation?


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

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


Legal Principle: A careless person becomes liable for his negligence when he owed a duty of care to others

Facts: As the bus was leaving the platform, Basappa rushed and boarded the bus keeping the door open. Beerappa who was standing at the edge of the platform, was hit by the door of the moving bus and injured. Beerappa takes Basappa to court demanding monetary compensation.


In an action for negligence the burden of proof is on the


The correct option is A.
In a negligence suit, the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the defendant did not act as a reasonable person would have acted under the circumstances. The court will instruct the jury as to the standard of conduct required of the defendant.


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.

Solution: Both A and R are true Assertion talks of unliquidated damages i.e Unliquidated damages are the sum of money that cannot be foreseen or assessed by a fixed formula. It is established by a judge or jury.The reason is talking of restitutionary damages given to a party to bring the party back to the same position and this is something not fixed hence R is the correct explanation of A

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.

The Constitution of India provides for the appointment of a Governor for a period of five years, the governor is appointed by president thus The Governor holds office during the pleasure of the President


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

Solution: According to the legal maxim which states that if someone willingly places themselves in a position where harm might result, knowing that some degree of harm might result, they are not able to bring a claim against the other party in tort or delict. Volenti applies only to the risk which a reasonable person would consider them as having assumed by their actions so. 

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.


Principle: A person cannot complain against a harm to which he has voluntarily consented. Precautions can be taken only against reasonably foreseeable mishaps.

Situation: At an athletic meet, during a hammer throw, the hammer came apart and hit a middle distance runner who was sitting 10 meters outside the throwing area. The runner sustained severe injuries on the head and neck. The runner filed a suit for damages. The standard precautions were taken for throwing the 7 kg hammer. The runner

i. would be able to recover because the organizers had failed to keep the equipment in good condition.

ii. would not be able to recover because the injuries were caused in a freak accident.

iii. would not be able to recover because she had agreed to participate in the sports meet with all the expectant risks.

iv. would not be able to recover because the accident was not reasonably foreseeable.


Principle: Injuria Sine Damnum i.e. Injury (violation of legal right) without damage

Facts: X, who was the returning officer at a polling booth in Amethi, wrongly refused to register a duly tendered vote of Y in the recent UP elections, even though Y was an eligible voter. The candidate in whose favour Y wanted to vote, was declared elected.


Principal 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.


Principle: Vicarious liability is the liability the Master or Principal for the tort committed in the course of employment. The wrongs of the servant/agent

Facts : ‘X’ hands over some cash money at his house to ‘Y’, who is his (X’s) neighbor and is also cashier in a bank, to be deposited in A’s account in the bank. Instead of depositing the money, ‘Y’ misappropriates it.


Principle : Damage without the violation of a legal right is not actionable in a court of law. It the interference with the rights of another person is not unlawful or unauthorized, but a necessary consequence of the exercise of defendant’s own lawful rights, no action should lie.

Facts : There was an Established School (‘ES’) in a particular locality. Subsequently, a New school (‘NS’) was set up in the same locality, which charged lower fees, on account of which people started patronizing the new school. Because of the competition, ‘ES’ had to reduce its fees. ‘ES’ filed a case against ‘NS’ saying that ‘NS’ has caused it (‘ES’) financial loss and thus claimed compensation.


Principle : Whenever there is an invasion of a legal right, the person in whom the right is vested, is entitled to bring an action though he has suffered no actual loss or harm and may recover damages (compensation).

Facts : ‘A’ was a qualified voter for the Lok Sabha election. However, a returning officer wrongfully refused to take to take A’s vote. Inspite of such wrongful refusal, the candidate, for whom ‘A’ wanted to vote, won the election. But ‘A’ brought an action for damages.


Principle: In a civil action for defamation, truth of the defamatory matter is an absolute defence. However, the burden of proving truth is on the defendant; and he is liable if he does not successfully discharge this burden.

Facts: ‘D’, who was the editor of a local weekly, published a series of articles mentioning that ‘P’, who was a government servant, issued false certificates, accepted bribe. adopted corrupt and illegal means to mint money and was a ‘mischief monger’. ‘P’ brought a civil action against ‘D’, who could not prove the facts published by him.

Under the circumstances, which of the following derivations is CORRECT?


Principle : Master is liable for the wrongful acts committed by his servant; provided the acts are committed during the course of employment. However, the master is to liable if the wrongful act committed by his servant has no connection, whatsoever, with the servant’s contract of employment.

Facts : ‘D’ is a driver employed by ‘M’, who is the owner of a company, During the lunch time, ‘D’ goes to a close by tea shop to have a cup of tea. There he (‘D’) picks up fight with the tea shop owner (‘T’), which resulted in some damage to his shop. ‘T’ wants to sue ‘M’ for claiming compensation for the damage caused by the fight


Principle : The constitution of India guarantees the ‘right to life’, which means to life under the constitution, however, does not include the right to die.

Facts : ‘M’ who is 90, lives all alone as he has no family or children or grandchildren. He suffers from physical and mental distress, as there is no one to look after him. He has little means to foot his medical expenses. Under these circumstances, he should be granted the right to die with dignity because he does not want to be a burden on the society. Further, as it is his life, he has a right to put an end to it.


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


The plaintiff, a lady visitor to a restaurant was injured by the ceiling fan which fell on her. The reason for the falling of the fan was a latent/hidden defect in the metal of the suspension rod of the fan. In an action against the defendant, he is:


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?


There are three remedies for false imprisonment. They are damages, habeas corpus and self help.So the correct option is D.


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?


The correct option is C.
‘bus owned by L, and driven by his servant R.’
Vicarious liability occurs here, as L was servant or R and was in course of employment.


The last opportunity principle is related to the


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 C.

According to the principle of vicarious liability, real master is vicariously liable for the wrongful acts


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.


The correct answer is B as according to the principle the taxi stand would be liable, because the driver ought not to have exceeded the speed limit.


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.


Similar Content

Related tests