Question Description
Directions: The question consists of one or more than one principle followed by a factual situation labelled as 'Facts'. You are to examine the principle(s) and apply it/them to the given situation carefully, and select the best option.Principle 1: A rash or negligent act causing death or grievous hurt is a punishable offence.Principle 2: In order to convict a person under this provision, it must be proved that the rash or negligent act was the direct or proximate cause of death or grievous hurt.Facts: Ramesh and Suresh were out on a drive and were driving an SUV at 80 kmph on the highway. There was a crossing ahead, and the road seemed to be clear. On reaching the crossing, they encountered a small moped. Ramesh applied the brakes immediately, and the car skidded. Suresh knew that Ramesh had not got his SUV serviced from a long time. He sued Ramesh for causing grievous hurt because of his negligent driving.Decide.a)Ramesh was negligent in driving because he had not got his SUV properly serviced.b)The moped driver should be held liable because it was he who came out of nowhere.c)Ramesh is not liable because his negligence was not the reason for Suresh's injuries.d)Ramesh is not liable as it was just an accident.e)NACorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 Directions: The question consists of one or more than one principle followed by a factual situation labelled as 'Facts'. You are to examine the principle(s) and apply it/them to the given situation carefully, and select the best option.Principle 1: A rash or negligent act causing death or grievous hurt is a punishable offence.Principle 2: In order to convict a person under this provision, it must be proved that the rash or negligent act was the direct or proximate cause of death or grievous hurt.Facts: Ramesh and Suresh were out on a drive and were driving an SUV at 80 kmph on the highway. There was a crossing ahead, and the road seemed to be clear. On reaching the crossing, they encountered a small moped. Ramesh applied the brakes immediately, and the car skidded. Suresh knew that Ramesh had not got his SUV serviced from a long time. He sued Ramesh for causing grievous hurt because of his negligent driving.Decide.a)Ramesh was negligent in driving because he had not got his SUV properly serviced.b)The moped driver should be held liable because it was he who came out of nowhere.c)Ramesh is not liable because his negligence was not the reason for Suresh's injuries.d)Ramesh is not liable as it was just an accident.e)NACorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: The question consists of one or more than one principle followed by a factual situation labelled as 'Facts'. You are to examine the principle(s) and apply it/them to the given situation carefully, and select the best option.Principle 1: A rash or negligent act causing death or grievous hurt is a punishable offence.Principle 2: In order to convict a person under this provision, it must be proved that the rash or negligent act was the direct or proximate cause of death or grievous hurt.Facts: Ramesh and Suresh were out on a drive and were driving an SUV at 80 kmph on the highway. There was a crossing ahead, and the road seemed to be clear. On reaching the crossing, they encountered a small moped. Ramesh applied the brakes immediately, and the car skidded. Suresh knew that Ramesh had not got his SUV serviced from a long time. He sued Ramesh for causing grievous hurt because of his negligent driving.Decide.a)Ramesh was negligent in driving because he had not got his SUV properly serviced.b)The moped driver should be held liable because it was he who came out of nowhere.c)Ramesh is not liable because his negligence was not the reason for Suresh's injuries.d)Ramesh is not liable as it was just an accident.e)NACorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: The question consists of one or more than one principle followed by a factual situation labelled as 'Facts'. You are to examine the principle(s) and apply it/them to the given situation carefully, and select the best option.Principle 1: A rash or negligent act causing death or grievous hurt is a punishable offence.Principle 2: In order to convict a person under this provision, it must be proved that the rash or negligent act was the direct or proximate cause of death or grievous hurt.Facts: Ramesh and Suresh were out on a drive and were driving an SUV at 80 kmph on the highway. There was a crossing ahead, and the road seemed to be clear. On reaching the crossing, they encountered a small moped. Ramesh applied the brakes immediately, and the car skidded. Suresh knew that Ramesh had not got his SUV serviced from a long time. He sued Ramesh for causing grievous hurt because of his negligent driving.Decide.a)Ramesh was negligent in driving because he had not got his SUV properly serviced.b)The moped driver should be held liable because it was he who came out of nowhere.c)Ramesh is not liable because his negligence was not the reason for Suresh's injuries.d)Ramesh is not liable as it was just an accident.e)NACorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 question consists of one or more than one principle followed by a factual situation labelled as 'Facts'. You are to examine the principle(s) and apply it/them to the given situation carefully, and select the best option.Principle 1: A rash or negligent act causing death or grievous hurt is a punishable offence.Principle 2: In order to convict a person under this provision, it must be proved that the rash or negligent act was the direct or proximate cause of death or grievous hurt.Facts: Ramesh and Suresh were out on a drive and were driving an SUV at 80 kmph on the highway. There was a crossing ahead, and the road seemed to be clear. On reaching the crossing, they encountered a small moped. Ramesh applied the brakes immediately, and the car skidded. Suresh knew that Ramesh had not got his SUV serviced from a long time. He sued Ramesh for causing grievous hurt because of his negligent driving.Decide.a)Ramesh was negligent in driving because he had not got his SUV properly serviced.b)The moped driver should be held liable because it was he who came out of nowhere.c)Ramesh is not liable because his negligence was not the reason for Suresh's injuries.d)Ramesh is not liable as it was just an accident.e)NACorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The question consists of one or more than one principle followed by a factual situation labelled as 'Facts'. You are to examine the principle(s) and apply it/them to the given situation carefully, and select the best option.Principle 1: A rash or negligent act causing death or grievous hurt is a punishable offence.Principle 2: In order to convict a person under this provision, it must be proved that the rash or negligent act was the direct or proximate cause of death or grievous hurt.Facts: Ramesh and Suresh were out on a drive and were driving an SUV at 80 kmph on the highway. There was a crossing ahead, and the road seemed to be clear. On reaching the crossing, they encountered a small moped. Ramesh applied the brakes immediately, and the car skidded. Suresh knew that Ramesh had not got his SUV serviced from a long time. He sued Ramesh for causing grievous hurt because of his negligent driving.Decide.a)Ramesh was negligent in driving because he had not got his SUV properly serviced.b)The moped driver should be held liable because it was he who came out of nowhere.c)Ramesh is not liable because his negligence was not the reason for Suresh's injuries.d)Ramesh is not liable as it was just an accident.e)NACorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The question consists of one or more than one principle followed by a factual situation labelled as 'Facts'. You are to examine the principle(s) and apply it/them to the given situation carefully, and select the best option.Principle 1: A rash or negligent act causing death or grievous hurt is a punishable offence.Principle 2: In order to convict a person under this provision, it must be proved that the rash or negligent act was the direct or proximate cause of death or grievous hurt.Facts: Ramesh and Suresh were out on a drive and were driving an SUV at 80 kmph on the highway. There was a crossing ahead, and the road seemed to be clear. On reaching the crossing, they encountered a small moped. Ramesh applied the brakes immediately, and the car skidded. Suresh knew that Ramesh had not got his SUV serviced from a long time. He sued Ramesh for causing grievous hurt because of his negligent driving.Decide.a)Ramesh was negligent in driving because he had not got his SUV properly serviced.b)The moped driver should be held liable because it was he who came out of nowhere.c)Ramesh is not liable because his negligence was not the reason for Suresh's injuries.d)Ramesh is not liable as it was just an accident.e)NACorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The question consists of one or more than one principle followed by a factual situation labelled as 'Facts'. You are to examine the principle(s) and apply it/them to the given situation carefully, and select the best option.Principle 1: A rash or negligent act causing death or grievous hurt is a punishable offence.Principle 2: In order to convict a person under this provision, it must be proved that the rash or negligent act was the direct or proximate cause of death or grievous hurt.Facts: Ramesh and Suresh were out on a drive and were driving an SUV at 80 kmph on the highway. There was a crossing ahead, and the road seemed to be clear. On reaching the crossing, they encountered a small moped. Ramesh applied the brakes immediately, and the car skidded. Suresh knew that Ramesh had not got his SUV serviced from a long time. He sued Ramesh for causing grievous hurt because of his negligent driving.Decide.a)Ramesh was negligent in driving because he had not got his SUV properly serviced.b)The moped driver should be held liable because it was he who came out of nowhere.c)Ramesh is not liable because his negligence was not the reason for Suresh's injuries.d)Ramesh is not liable as it was just an accident.e)NACorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The question consists of one or more than one principle followed by a factual situation labelled as 'Facts'. You are to examine the principle(s) and apply it/them to the given situation carefully, and select the best option.Principle 1: A rash or negligent act causing death or grievous hurt is a punishable offence.Principle 2: In order to convict a person under this provision, it must be proved that the rash or negligent act was the direct or proximate cause of death or grievous hurt.Facts: Ramesh and Suresh were out on a drive and were driving an SUV at 80 kmph on the highway. There was a crossing ahead, and the road seemed to be clear. On reaching the crossing, they encountered a small moped. Ramesh applied the brakes immediately, and the car skidded. Suresh knew that Ramesh had not got his SUV serviced from a long time. He sued Ramesh for causing grievous hurt because of his negligent driving.Decide.a)Ramesh was negligent in driving because he had not got his SUV properly serviced.b)The moped driver should be held liable because it was he who came out of nowhere.c)Ramesh is not liable because his negligence was not the reason for Suresh's injuries.d)Ramesh is not liable as it was just an accident.e)NACorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.