Question Description
Directions: The sentence given below is a legal principle followed by a factual situation based on the legal principle. Choose the correct option, which relates both the principle and the situation.Principle: The standard to determine whether a person has been guilty of negligence is the standard of care which, in the given circumstances, a reasonable man could have foreseen.Facts: The Agricultural University constructed 200 houses for its employees in its premises. Two huge bore wells were sunk and motors were installed. They did not cover the pump rooms properly. A child, 6 years old, from one of the quarters was playing near the pump house. On hearing the noise of the pump, she was curious to see the motor. She touched the motor that was not covered properly and three of her fingers were cut.Decision:a)The parents of the child cannot sue the university on any grounds.b)In spite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the university for damages.c)The university can be made liable only to the extent of the cost of treatment as the child also contributed to the incident.d)Only the child can sue and not her parents.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: The sentence given below is a legal principle followed by a factual situation based on the legal principle. Choose the correct option, which relates both the principle and the situation.Principle: The standard to determine whether a person has been guilty of negligence is the standard of care which, in the given circumstances, a reasonable man could have foreseen.Facts: The Agricultural University constructed 200 houses for its employees in its premises. Two huge bore wells were sunk and motors were installed. They did not cover the pump rooms properly. A child, 6 years old, from one of the quarters was playing near the pump house. On hearing the noise of the pump, she was curious to see the motor. She touched the motor that was not covered properly and three of her fingers were cut.Decision:a)The parents of the child cannot sue the university on any grounds.b)In spite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the university for damages.c)The university can be made liable only to the extent of the cost of treatment as the child also contributed to the incident.d)Only the child can sue and not her parents.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: The sentence given below is a legal principle followed by a factual situation based on the legal principle. Choose the correct option, which relates both the principle and the situation.Principle: The standard to determine whether a person has been guilty of negligence is the standard of care which, in the given circumstances, a reasonable man could have foreseen.Facts: The Agricultural University constructed 200 houses for its employees in its premises. Two huge bore wells were sunk and motors were installed. They did not cover the pump rooms properly. A child, 6 years old, from one of the quarters was playing near the pump house. On hearing the noise of the pump, she was curious to see the motor. She touched the motor that was not covered properly and three of her fingers were cut.Decision:a)The parents of the child cannot sue the university on any grounds.b)In spite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the university for damages.c)The university can be made liable only to the extent of the cost of treatment as the child also contributed to the incident.d)Only the child can sue and not her parents.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: The sentence given below is a legal principle followed by a factual situation based on the legal principle. Choose the correct option, which relates both the principle and the situation.Principle: The standard to determine whether a person has been guilty of negligence is the standard of care which, in the given circumstances, a reasonable man could have foreseen.Facts: The Agricultural University constructed 200 houses for its employees in its premises. Two huge bore wells were sunk and motors were installed. They did not cover the pump rooms properly. A child, 6 years old, from one of the quarters was playing near the pump house. On hearing the noise of the pump, she was curious to see the motor. She touched the motor that was not covered properly and three of her fingers were cut.Decision:a)The parents of the child cannot sue the university on any grounds.b)In spite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the university for damages.c)The university can be made liable only to the extent of the cost of treatment as the child also contributed to the incident.d)Only the child can sue and not her parents.Correct answer is option 'B'. 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 Directions: The sentence given below is a legal principle followed by a factual situation based on the legal principle. Choose the correct option, which relates both the principle and the situation.Principle: The standard to determine whether a person has been guilty of negligence is the standard of care which, in the given circumstances, a reasonable man could have foreseen.Facts: The Agricultural University constructed 200 houses for its employees in its premises. Two huge bore wells were sunk and motors were installed. They did not cover the pump rooms properly. A child, 6 years old, from one of the quarters was playing near the pump house. On hearing the noise of the pump, she was curious to see the motor. She touched the motor that was not covered properly and three of her fingers were cut.Decision:a)The parents of the child cannot sue the university on any grounds.b)In spite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the university for damages.c)The university can be made liable only to the extent of the cost of treatment as the child also contributed to the incident.d)Only the child can sue and not her parents.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The sentence given below is a legal principle followed by a factual situation based on the legal principle. Choose the correct option, which relates both the principle and the situation.Principle: The standard to determine whether a person has been guilty of negligence is the standard of care which, in the given circumstances, a reasonable man could have foreseen.Facts: The Agricultural University constructed 200 houses for its employees in its premises. Two huge bore wells were sunk and motors were installed. They did not cover the pump rooms properly. A child, 6 years old, from one of the quarters was playing near the pump house. On hearing the noise of the pump, she was curious to see the motor. She touched the motor that was not covered properly and three of her fingers were cut.Decision:a)The parents of the child cannot sue the university on any grounds.b)In spite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the university for damages.c)The university can be made liable only to the extent of the cost of treatment as the child also contributed to the incident.d)Only the child can sue and not her parents.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The sentence given below is a legal principle followed by a factual situation based on the legal principle. Choose the correct option, which relates both the principle and the situation.Principle: The standard to determine whether a person has been guilty of negligence is the standard of care which, in the given circumstances, a reasonable man could have foreseen.Facts: The Agricultural University constructed 200 houses for its employees in its premises. Two huge bore wells were sunk and motors were installed. They did not cover the pump rooms properly. A child, 6 years old, from one of the quarters was playing near the pump house. On hearing the noise of the pump, she was curious to see the motor. She touched the motor that was not covered properly and three of her fingers were cut.Decision:a)The parents of the child cannot sue the university on any grounds.b)In spite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the university for damages.c)The university can be made liable only to the extent of the cost of treatment as the child also contributed to the incident.d)Only the child can sue and not her parents.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The sentence given below is a legal principle followed by a factual situation based on the legal principle. Choose the correct option, which relates both the principle and the situation.Principle: The standard to determine whether a person has been guilty of negligence is the standard of care which, in the given circumstances, a reasonable man could have foreseen.Facts: The Agricultural University constructed 200 houses for its employees in its premises. Two huge bore wells were sunk and motors were installed. They did not cover the pump rooms properly. A child, 6 years old, from one of the quarters was playing near the pump house. On hearing the noise of the pump, she was curious to see the motor. She touched the motor that was not covered properly and three of her fingers were cut.Decision:a)The parents of the child cannot sue the university on any grounds.b)In spite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the university for damages.c)The university can be made liable only to the extent of the cost of treatment as the child also contributed to the incident.d)Only the child can sue and not her parents.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The sentence given below is a legal principle followed by a factual situation based on the legal principle. Choose the correct option, which relates both the principle and the situation.Principle: The standard to determine whether a person has been guilty of negligence is the standard of care which, in the given circumstances, a reasonable man could have foreseen.Facts: The Agricultural University constructed 200 houses for its employees in its premises. Two huge bore wells were sunk and motors were installed. They did not cover the pump rooms properly. A child, 6 years old, from one of the quarters was playing near the pump house. On hearing the noise of the pump, she was curious to see the motor. She touched the motor that was not covered properly and three of her fingers were cut.Decision:a)The parents of the child cannot sue the university on any grounds.b)In spite of the child's act, her parents can successfully sue the university for damages.c)The university can be made liable only to the extent of the cost of treatment as the child also contributed to the incident.d)Only the child can sue and not her parents.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.