CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > Principles: An unlawful interference with a ...
Start Learning for Free
Principles: 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 law of tort.
Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. which
one of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?
- a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.
- b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liability
- c)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisance
- d)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Principles: An unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment...
The Correct Decision in the Suit for Nuisance
Introduction
In the given scenario, the neighboring shopkeepers have filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant, who is a shopkeeper with a license to sell fruits and vegetables. The long queues of customers outside the defendant's shop during the scarcity of onions have caused obstruction to the neighboring shops and extended onto the highway. The question is which decision would be correct in this suit.
Explanation
Principle of Law
According to the principle of law, an unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it, is considered a nuisance in the law of tort.
Analysis of the Facts
In this case, the long queues of customers waiting to buy onions outside the defendant's shop have caused obstruction to the neighboring shops and extended onto the highway. This interference with the neighboring shopkeepers' ability to conduct their business and the obstruction caused on the highway can be seen as an interference with their use and enjoyment of their land and their rights over it.
Application of the Principle
Applying the principle to the facts of the case, it can be concluded that the defendant's actions have constituted a nuisance. The long queues and obstruction caused by the defendant's shop have unlawfully interfered with the neighboring shopkeepers' use and enjoyment of their land. Therefore, the defendant can be held liable for the nuisance caused.
Correct Decision
The correct decision in this suit would be option 'D' - The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance. As the defendant's actions have constituted a nuisance by interfering with the neighboring shopkeepers' use and enjoyment of their land, the shopkeeper should be held responsible and liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.
Conclusion
In conclusion, according to the principle of law and the analysis of the given facts, the correct decision in the suit for nuisance would be that the shopkeeper is liable for the nuisance caused. The neighboring shopkeepers can seek damages for the interference with their use and enjoyment of their land caused by the long queues and obstruction caused by the defendant's shop.
Introduction
In the given scenario, the neighboring shopkeepers have filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant, who is a shopkeeper with a license to sell fruits and vegetables. The long queues of customers outside the defendant's shop during the scarcity of onions have caused obstruction to the neighboring shops and extended onto the highway. The question is which decision would be correct in this suit.
Explanation
Principle of Law
According to the principle of law, an unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land, or some right over, or in connection with it, is considered a nuisance in the law of tort.
Analysis of the Facts
In this case, the long queues of customers waiting to buy onions outside the defendant's shop have caused obstruction to the neighboring shops and extended onto the highway. This interference with the neighboring shopkeepers' ability to conduct their business and the obstruction caused on the highway can be seen as an interference with their use and enjoyment of their land and their rights over it.
Application of the Principle
Applying the principle to the facts of the case, it can be concluded that the defendant's actions have constituted a nuisance. The long queues and obstruction caused by the defendant's shop have unlawfully interfered with the neighboring shopkeepers' use and enjoyment of their land. Therefore, the defendant can be held liable for the nuisance caused.
Correct Decision
The correct decision in this suit would be option 'D' - The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance. As the defendant's actions have constituted a nuisance by interfering with the neighboring shopkeepers' use and enjoyment of their land, the shopkeeper should be held responsible and liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.
Conclusion
In conclusion, according to the principle of law and the analysis of the given facts, the correct decision in the suit for nuisance would be that the shopkeeper is liable for the nuisance caused. The neighboring shopkeepers can seek damages for the interference with their use and enjoyment of their land caused by the long queues and obstruction caused by the defendant's shop.
Free Test
FREE
| Start Free Test |
Community Answer
Principles: An unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment...
Although the shopkeeper has not committed any wrongful act but indirectly his act was the cause of unlawful interference with the other' use and enjoyment of land.
|
Explore Courses for CLAT exam
|
|
Similar CLAT Doubts
Top Courses for CLATView all
Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.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 Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.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 Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.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 Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.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 Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.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 Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of
Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an
ample number of questions to practice Principles: 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 law of tort.Facts: During the scarcity of onions , long queues were made outside the defendant's shop who having a licence to sell fruits and vegetables used to sell only 1 kg of onion per ration card. The queues extended on to the highway and also caused some obstruction to the neighbouring shops. The neighbouring shopkeepers filed a suit for nuisance against the defendant. whichone of the following decisions will be correct in this suit?a)The shopkeeper is liable to pay damages to all the plaintiffs.b)The shopkeeper is liable under strict liabilityc)The shopkeeper is not liable for nuisanced)The shopkeeper is liable for nuisance.Correct 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