Question Description
Principle:Any physical interference with goods, intentionally, negligently or even by honest mistake, without lawful justification is a trespass to goods.Facts:On Avinash's death, his sister-in-law, Sravanti, removed some jewellery from the room where Avinash's dead body was lying, to another room under a reasonable but mistaken belief that the same was necessary for its safety.a)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods.b)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods.c)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods, if it can be established that she intended to steal the jewellery.d)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods, as her honest but mistaken intention was the safety of the jewellery.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Principle:Any physical interference with goods, intentionally, negligently or even by honest mistake, without lawful justification is a trespass to goods.Facts:On Avinash's death, his sister-in-law, Sravanti, removed some jewellery from the room where Avinash's dead body was lying, to another room under a reasonable but mistaken belief that the same was necessary for its safety.a)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods.b)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods.c)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods, if it can be established that she intended to steal the jewellery.d)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods, as her honest but mistaken intention was the safety of the jewellery.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Principle:Any physical interference with goods, intentionally, negligently or even by honest mistake, without lawful justification is a trespass to goods.Facts:On Avinash's death, his sister-in-law, Sravanti, removed some jewellery from the room where Avinash's dead body was lying, to another room under a reasonable but mistaken belief that the same was necessary for its safety.a)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods.b)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods.c)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods, if it can be established that she intended to steal the jewellery.d)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods, as her honest but mistaken intention was the safety of the jewellery.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Principle:Any physical interference with goods, intentionally, negligently or even by honest mistake, without lawful justification is a trespass to goods.Facts:On Avinash's death, his sister-in-law, Sravanti, removed some jewellery from the room where Avinash's dead body was lying, to another room under a reasonable but mistaken belief that the same was necessary for its safety.a)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods.b)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods.c)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods, if it can be established that she intended to steal the jewellery.d)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods, as her honest but mistaken intention was the safety of the jewellery.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Principle:Any physical interference with goods, intentionally, negligently or even by honest mistake, without lawful justification is a trespass to goods.Facts:On Avinash's death, his sister-in-law, Sravanti, removed some jewellery from the room where Avinash's dead body was lying, to another room under a reasonable but mistaken belief that the same was necessary for its safety.a)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods.b)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods.c)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods, if it can be established that she intended to steal the jewellery.d)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods, as her honest but mistaken intention was the safety of the jewellery.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Principle:Any physical interference with goods, intentionally, negligently or even by honest mistake, without lawful justification is a trespass to goods.Facts:On Avinash's death, his sister-in-law, Sravanti, removed some jewellery from the room where Avinash's dead body was lying, to another room under a reasonable but mistaken belief that the same was necessary for its safety.a)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods.b)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods.c)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods, if it can be established that she intended to steal the jewellery.d)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods, as her honest but mistaken intention was the safety of the jewellery.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Principle:Any physical interference with goods, intentionally, negligently or even by honest mistake, without lawful justification is a trespass to goods.Facts:On Avinash's death, his sister-in-law, Sravanti, removed some jewellery from the room where Avinash's dead body was lying, to another room under a reasonable but mistaken belief that the same was necessary for its safety.a)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods.b)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods.c)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods, if it can be established that she intended to steal the jewellery.d)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods, as her honest but mistaken intention was the safety of the jewellery.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Principle:Any physical interference with goods, intentionally, negligently or even by honest mistake, without lawful justification is a trespass to goods.Facts:On Avinash's death, his sister-in-law, Sravanti, removed some jewellery from the room where Avinash's dead body was lying, to another room under a reasonable but mistaken belief that the same was necessary for its safety.a)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods.b)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods.c)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods, if it can be established that she intended to steal the jewellery.d)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods, as her honest but mistaken intention was the safety of the jewellery.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Principle:Any physical interference with goods, intentionally, negligently or even by honest mistake, without lawful justification is a trespass to goods.Facts:On Avinash's death, his sister-in-law, Sravanti, removed some jewellery from the room where Avinash's dead body was lying, to another room under a reasonable but mistaken belief that the same was necessary for its safety.a)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods.b)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods.c)Sravanti is liable for trespass to goods, if it can be established that she intended to steal the jewellery.d)Sravanti is not liable for trespass to goods, as her honest but mistaken intention was the safety of the jewellery.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.