CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > Instruction: This section consists of five p...
Start Learning for Free
Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.
Rules : Problem 4
A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.
B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.
C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.
D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.
Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.
Decide
- a)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.
- b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.
- c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.
- d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the house
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Verified Answer
Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each pr...
No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the house
Most Upvoted Answer
Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each pr...
Understanding Trespass in Context
In this scenario, Mr. A's urgent actions were critical for the safety of his son, which leads to the justification for his entry into Mr. B’s house.
Key Points Regarding Trespass
- Definition of Trespass: Trespass is defined as interference with the possession of land without lawful justification. However, justification plays a significant role in determining whether an act constitutes trespass.
- Justification for Entry: According to the rules, if a person has justification to enter someone else's premises, it does not constitute trespass. In emergencies, such justifications are often deemed reasonable.
Analysis of the Situation
- Emergency Circumstances: Mr. A’s house was on fire, creating an immediate and hazardous situation. He needed to rescue his son, which can be classified as an emergency that warrants swift action.
- Neighborly Context: In communities, especially among neighbors, it is generally understood that assistance may be required in emergencies. This context further supports Mr. A’s reasonable justification for entering Mr. B’s property.
Conclusion
Given these points, the correct answer is option 'D': No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the house. Mr. A’s actions were not driven by malice or intent to cause harm; rather, they were motivated by the urgent need to save his son from a life-threatening situation, establishing a lawful reason for his entry into Mr. B’s home. Thus, his actions do not constitute trespass under the applicable rules.
In this scenario, Mr. A's urgent actions were critical for the safety of his son, which leads to the justification for his entry into Mr. B’s house.
Key Points Regarding Trespass
- Definition of Trespass: Trespass is defined as interference with the possession of land without lawful justification. However, justification plays a significant role in determining whether an act constitutes trespass.
- Justification for Entry: According to the rules, if a person has justification to enter someone else's premises, it does not constitute trespass. In emergencies, such justifications are often deemed reasonable.
Analysis of the Situation
- Emergency Circumstances: Mr. A’s house was on fire, creating an immediate and hazardous situation. He needed to rescue his son, which can be classified as an emergency that warrants swift action.
- Neighborly Context: In communities, especially among neighbors, it is generally understood that assistance may be required in emergencies. This context further supports Mr. A’s reasonable justification for entering Mr. B’s property.
Conclusion
Given these points, the correct answer is option 'D': No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the house. Mr. A’s actions were not driven by malice or intent to cause harm; rather, they were motivated by the urgent need to save his son from a life-threatening situation, establishing a lawful reason for his entry into Mr. B’s home. Thus, his actions do not constitute trespass under the applicable rules.
|
Explore Courses for CLAT exam
|
|
Similar CLAT Doubts
Top Courses for CLATView all
Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect 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 Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect 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 Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect 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 Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect 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 Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect 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 Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of
Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an
ample number of questions to practice Instruction: This section consists of five problems in total. Each problem consists of a set of rules and facts. Apply the specified rules to the set of facts and answer the questions.Rules : Problem 4A. Trespass to land means interference with the possession of land without lawful justification.B. Trespass could be committed either by a person himself entering the land of another or doing the same through some material object: stick, stones etc.C. When a person enters certain premises under the authority of some law and after having entered there abuses that authority by committing some wrongful act there, he will be considered a trespasser.D. Where there is justification to enter the premises it is no trespass.Facts: Mr. A and B were neighbours in a locality but were not friendly with each other and there was always some fight going on between both of them. Decide as per the questions.Mr. A’s house caught fire one day so to get into his house to get his son out of the house he went through Mr.B’s house. Mr B sued him for trespass.Decidea)Yes, because he did commit the act of trespassing.b)Yes, he should have taken fire police help to get his son out.c)No, because neighbours do enter each other’s houses.d)No, because he had a reasonable justification to enter the houseCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
|
|
Explore Courses for CLAT exam
|
|
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
|
© EduRev
|
Education Revolution
|
|
Signup to see your scores
go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup