Question Description
Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.Trespass can be defined as an unjustifiable physical interference of land in possession of one party by another. Under English common law where these principles of torts emanate, trespass does not form a criminal act but in the Indian Penal Code it has been given recognition i.e. under section 441 But it defines trespass as unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so. The Intention part is present due to it being under a criminal code where in 'mens rea' is a part.Under English Common Law the maxim that is used for trespass is 'trespass quare clausam fregit' which means "because he (the defendant) broke or entered into the close". The tort of trespass requires essentially only the possession of land by the plaintiff and encroachment by some way by the defendant. There requires no force, unlawful intention or damage nor the breaking of an enclosure. One of the most important ingredients of a tort of trespass is the fact that the land in question which has been encroached upon essentially needs to be in the direct possession of the plaintiff and not just mere physical presence on it. Another essential provision of the tort of trespass includes in the directness of the act. If the act is direct i.e. arising out of the natural consequences of the act of the defendant then it is valid. But trespass is encroachment upon property whereas nuisance is interference upon another's right to enjoy his property.Also if a person enters upon another's land and stays on it, the act is connoted as continuing trespass. Furthermore the owner of a land is entitled to the airspace above him but he is aerial trespass has a very important ingredient which is that the object that enters his land aerially should be at such height that it violates his right to enjoy his property and moreover violate his right of ordinary use of his land.The subject matter for an action is a notable point. Merely walking on a land possessed by the plaintiff forms a tort as it involves encroaching upon the legal right to own property. The general principle of subject matter was prescribed in the many cases. It was held that anything associated with the soil and which is capable of being possessed individually forms the subject matter in the tort. Therefore if there is any damage incurred upon any object which is associated with the land of the plaintiff an action in trespass may be instituted.Q. P has a pet dog Zambo. It has a tendency to go to Q's land which is adjacent to P′sP's. Despite knowing this P never chained Zambo and it always was let free. One day Zambo entered into the land of Q and attacked his pet kitten which died eventually. Q sued P.a)P is liable for trespass as there was negligence in taking care of the dog so as to enable them to enter onto land of Q.b)P is liable as its P's dog which entered into land of Q although it clearly proves that p had intention to make Zambo enter into the land.c)P is liable for nuisance as it is the dog which caused disturbance.d)P is not liable for any offense as he did not order the dog to go to land of Q. The dog must be held liable as he went on his own will.Correct answer is option 'A'. 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: Read the passage and answer the following question.Trespass can be defined as an unjustifiable physical interference of land in possession of one party by another. Under English common law where these principles of torts emanate, trespass does not form a criminal act but in the Indian Penal Code it has been given recognition i.e. under section 441 But it defines trespass as unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so. The Intention part is present due to it being under a criminal code where in 'mens rea' is a part.Under English Common Law the maxim that is used for trespass is 'trespass quare clausam fregit' which means "because he (the defendant) broke or entered into the close". The tort of trespass requires essentially only the possession of land by the plaintiff and encroachment by some way by the defendant. There requires no force, unlawful intention or damage nor the breaking of an enclosure. One of the most important ingredients of a tort of trespass is the fact that the land in question which has been encroached upon essentially needs to be in the direct possession of the plaintiff and not just mere physical presence on it. Another essential provision of the tort of trespass includes in the directness of the act. If the act is direct i.e. arising out of the natural consequences of the act of the defendant then it is valid. But trespass is encroachment upon property whereas nuisance is interference upon another's right to enjoy his property.Also if a person enters upon another's land and stays on it, the act is connoted as continuing trespass. Furthermore the owner of a land is entitled to the airspace above him but he is aerial trespass has a very important ingredient which is that the object that enters his land aerially should be at such height that it violates his right to enjoy his property and moreover violate his right of ordinary use of his land.The subject matter for an action is a notable point. Merely walking on a land possessed by the plaintiff forms a tort as it involves encroaching upon the legal right to own property. The general principle of subject matter was prescribed in the many cases. It was held that anything associated with the soil and which is capable of being possessed individually forms the subject matter in the tort. Therefore if there is any damage incurred upon any object which is associated with the land of the plaintiff an action in trespass may be instituted.Q. P has a pet dog Zambo. It has a tendency to go to Q's land which is adjacent to P′sP's. Despite knowing this P never chained Zambo and it always was let free. One day Zambo entered into the land of Q and attacked his pet kitten which died eventually. Q sued P.a)P is liable for trespass as there was negligence in taking care of the dog so as to enable them to enter onto land of Q.b)P is liable as its P's dog which entered into land of Q although it clearly proves that p had intention to make Zambo enter into the land.c)P is liable for nuisance as it is the dog which caused disturbance.d)P is not liable for any offense as he did not order the dog to go to land of Q. The dog must be held liable as he went on his own will.Correct answer is option 'A'. 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: Read the passage and answer the following question.Trespass can be defined as an unjustifiable physical interference of land in possession of one party by another. Under English common law where these principles of torts emanate, trespass does not form a criminal act but in the Indian Penal Code it has been given recognition i.e. under section 441 But it defines trespass as unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so. The Intention part is present due to it being under a criminal code where in 'mens rea' is a part.Under English Common Law the maxim that is used for trespass is 'trespass quare clausam fregit' which means "because he (the defendant) broke or entered into the close". The tort of trespass requires essentially only the possession of land by the plaintiff and encroachment by some way by the defendant. There requires no force, unlawful intention or damage nor the breaking of an enclosure. One of the most important ingredients of a tort of trespass is the fact that the land in question which has been encroached upon essentially needs to be in the direct possession of the plaintiff and not just mere physical presence on it. Another essential provision of the tort of trespass includes in the directness of the act. If the act is direct i.e. arising out of the natural consequences of the act of the defendant then it is valid. But trespass is encroachment upon property whereas nuisance is interference upon another's right to enjoy his property.Also if a person enters upon another's land and stays on it, the act is connoted as continuing trespass. Furthermore the owner of a land is entitled to the airspace above him but he is aerial trespass has a very important ingredient which is that the object that enters his land aerially should be at such height that it violates his right to enjoy his property and moreover violate his right of ordinary use of his land.The subject matter for an action is a notable point. Merely walking on a land possessed by the plaintiff forms a tort as it involves encroaching upon the legal right to own property. The general principle of subject matter was prescribed in the many cases. It was held that anything associated with the soil and which is capable of being possessed individually forms the subject matter in the tort. Therefore if there is any damage incurred upon any object which is associated with the land of the plaintiff an action in trespass may be instituted.Q. P has a pet dog Zambo. It has a tendency to go to Q's land which is adjacent to P′sP's. Despite knowing this P never chained Zambo and it always was let free. One day Zambo entered into the land of Q and attacked his pet kitten which died eventually. Q sued P.a)P is liable for trespass as there was negligence in taking care of the dog so as to enable them to enter onto land of Q.b)P is liable as its P's dog which entered into land of Q although it clearly proves that p had intention to make Zambo enter into the land.c)P is liable for nuisance as it is the dog which caused disturbance.d)P is not liable for any offense as he did not order the dog to go to land of Q. The dog must be held liable as he went on his own will.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.Trespass can be defined as an unjustifiable physical interference of land in possession of one party by another. Under English common law where these principles of torts emanate, trespass does not form a criminal act but in the Indian Penal Code it has been given recognition i.e. under section 441 But it defines trespass as unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so. The Intention part is present due to it being under a criminal code where in 'mens rea' is a part.Under English Common Law the maxim that is used for trespass is 'trespass quare clausam fregit' which means "because he (the defendant) broke or entered into the close". The tort of trespass requires essentially only the possession of land by the plaintiff and encroachment by some way by the defendant. There requires no force, unlawful intention or damage nor the breaking of an enclosure. One of the most important ingredients of a tort of trespass is the fact that the land in question which has been encroached upon essentially needs to be in the direct possession of the plaintiff and not just mere physical presence on it. Another essential provision of the tort of trespass includes in the directness of the act. If the act is direct i.e. arising out of the natural consequences of the act of the defendant then it is valid. But trespass is encroachment upon property whereas nuisance is interference upon another's right to enjoy his property.Also if a person enters upon another's land and stays on it, the act is connoted as continuing trespass. Furthermore the owner of a land is entitled to the airspace above him but he is aerial trespass has a very important ingredient which is that the object that enters his land aerially should be at such height that it violates his right to enjoy his property and moreover violate his right of ordinary use of his land.The subject matter for an action is a notable point. Merely walking on a land possessed by the plaintiff forms a tort as it involves encroaching upon the legal right to own property. The general principle of subject matter was prescribed in the many cases. It was held that anything associated with the soil and which is capable of being possessed individually forms the subject matter in the tort. Therefore if there is any damage incurred upon any object which is associated with the land of the plaintiff an action in trespass may be instituted.Q. P has a pet dog Zambo. It has a tendency to go to Q's land which is adjacent to P′sP's. Despite knowing this P never chained Zambo and it always was let free. One day Zambo entered into the land of Q and attacked his pet kitten which died eventually. Q sued P.a)P is liable for trespass as there was negligence in taking care of the dog so as to enable them to enter onto land of Q.b)P is liable as its P's dog which entered into land of Q although it clearly proves that p had intention to make Zambo enter into the land.c)P is liable for nuisance as it is the dog which caused disturbance.d)P is not liable for any offense as he did not order the dog to go to land of Q. The dog must be held liable as he went on his own will.Correct answer is option 'A'. 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: Read the passage and answer the following question.Trespass can be defined as an unjustifiable physical interference of land in possession of one party by another. Under English common law where these principles of torts emanate, trespass does not form a criminal act but in the Indian Penal Code it has been given recognition i.e. under section 441 But it defines trespass as unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so. The Intention part is present due to it being under a criminal code where in 'mens rea' is a part.Under English Common Law the maxim that is used for trespass is 'trespass quare clausam fregit' which means "because he (the defendant) broke or entered into the close". The tort of trespass requires essentially only the possession of land by the plaintiff and encroachment by some way by the defendant. There requires no force, unlawful intention or damage nor the breaking of an enclosure. One of the most important ingredients of a tort of trespass is the fact that the land in question which has been encroached upon essentially needs to be in the direct possession of the plaintiff and not just mere physical presence on it. Another essential provision of the tort of trespass includes in the directness of the act. If the act is direct i.e. arising out of the natural consequences of the act of the defendant then it is valid. But trespass is encroachment upon property whereas nuisance is interference upon another's right to enjoy his property.Also if a person enters upon another's land and stays on it, the act is connoted as continuing trespass. Furthermore the owner of a land is entitled to the airspace above him but he is aerial trespass has a very important ingredient which is that the object that enters his land aerially should be at such height that it violates his right to enjoy his property and moreover violate his right of ordinary use of his land.The subject matter for an action is a notable point. Merely walking on a land possessed by the plaintiff forms a tort as it involves encroaching upon the legal right to own property. The general principle of subject matter was prescribed in the many cases. It was held that anything associated with the soil and which is capable of being possessed individually forms the subject matter in the tort. Therefore if there is any damage incurred upon any object which is associated with the land of the plaintiff an action in trespass may be instituted.Q. P has a pet dog Zambo. It has a tendency to go to Q's land which is adjacent to P′sP's. Despite knowing this P never chained Zambo and it always was let free. One day Zambo entered into the land of Q and attacked his pet kitten which died eventually. Q sued P.a)P is liable for trespass as there was negligence in taking care of the dog so as to enable them to enter onto land of Q.b)P is liable as its P's dog which entered into land of Q although it clearly proves that p had intention to make Zambo enter into the land.c)P is liable for nuisance as it is the dog which caused disturbance.d)P is not liable for any offense as he did not order the dog to go to land of Q. The dog must be held liable as he went on his own will.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.Trespass can be defined as an unjustifiable physical interference of land in possession of one party by another. Under English common law where these principles of torts emanate, trespass does not form a criminal act but in the Indian Penal Code it has been given recognition i.e. under section 441 But it defines trespass as unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so. The Intention part is present due to it being under a criminal code where in 'mens rea' is a part.Under English Common Law the maxim that is used for trespass is 'trespass quare clausam fregit' which means "because he (the defendant) broke or entered into the close". The tort of trespass requires essentially only the possession of land by the plaintiff and encroachment by some way by the defendant. There requires no force, unlawful intention or damage nor the breaking of an enclosure. One of the most important ingredients of a tort of trespass is the fact that the land in question which has been encroached upon essentially needs to be in the direct possession of the plaintiff and not just mere physical presence on it. Another essential provision of the tort of trespass includes in the directness of the act. If the act is direct i.e. arising out of the natural consequences of the act of the defendant then it is valid. But trespass is encroachment upon property whereas nuisance is interference upon another's right to enjoy his property.Also if a person enters upon another's land and stays on it, the act is connoted as continuing trespass. Furthermore the owner of a land is entitled to the airspace above him but he is aerial trespass has a very important ingredient which is that the object that enters his land aerially should be at such height that it violates his right to enjoy his property and moreover violate his right of ordinary use of his land.The subject matter for an action is a notable point. Merely walking on a land possessed by the plaintiff forms a tort as it involves encroaching upon the legal right to own property. The general principle of subject matter was prescribed in the many cases. It was held that anything associated with the soil and which is capable of being possessed individually forms the subject matter in the tort. Therefore if there is any damage incurred upon any object which is associated with the land of the plaintiff an action in trespass may be instituted.Q. P has a pet dog Zambo. It has a tendency to go to Q's land which is adjacent to P′sP's. Despite knowing this P never chained Zambo and it always was let free. One day Zambo entered into the land of Q and attacked his pet kitten which died eventually. Q sued P.a)P is liable for trespass as there was negligence in taking care of the dog so as to enable them to enter onto land of Q.b)P is liable as its P's dog which entered into land of Q although it clearly proves that p had intention to make Zambo enter into the land.c)P is liable for nuisance as it is the dog which caused disturbance.d)P is not liable for any offense as he did not order the dog to go to land of Q. The dog must be held liable as he went on his own will.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.Trespass can be defined as an unjustifiable physical interference of land in possession of one party by another. Under English common law where these principles of torts emanate, trespass does not form a criminal act but in the Indian Penal Code it has been given recognition i.e. under section 441 But it defines trespass as unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so. The Intention part is present due to it being under a criminal code where in 'mens rea' is a part.Under English Common Law the maxim that is used for trespass is 'trespass quare clausam fregit' which means "because he (the defendant) broke or entered into the close". The tort of trespass requires essentially only the possession of land by the plaintiff and encroachment by some way by the defendant. There requires no force, unlawful intention or damage nor the breaking of an enclosure. One of the most important ingredients of a tort of trespass is the fact that the land in question which has been encroached upon essentially needs to be in the direct possession of the plaintiff and not just mere physical presence on it. Another essential provision of the tort of trespass includes in the directness of the act. If the act is direct i.e. arising out of the natural consequences of the act of the defendant then it is valid. But trespass is encroachment upon property whereas nuisance is interference upon another's right to enjoy his property.Also if a person enters upon another's land and stays on it, the act is connoted as continuing trespass. Furthermore the owner of a land is entitled to the airspace above him but he is aerial trespass has a very important ingredient which is that the object that enters his land aerially should be at such height that it violates his right to enjoy his property and moreover violate his right of ordinary use of his land.The subject matter for an action is a notable point. Merely walking on a land possessed by the plaintiff forms a tort as it involves encroaching upon the legal right to own property. The general principle of subject matter was prescribed in the many cases. It was held that anything associated with the soil and which is capable of being possessed individually forms the subject matter in the tort. Therefore if there is any damage incurred upon any object which is associated with the land of the plaintiff an action in trespass may be instituted.Q. P has a pet dog Zambo. It has a tendency to go to Q's land which is adjacent to P′sP's. Despite knowing this P never chained Zambo and it always was let free. One day Zambo entered into the land of Q and attacked his pet kitten which died eventually. Q sued P.a)P is liable for trespass as there was negligence in taking care of the dog so as to enable them to enter onto land of Q.b)P is liable as its P's dog which entered into land of Q although it clearly proves that p had intention to make Zambo enter into the land.c)P is liable for nuisance as it is the dog which caused disturbance.d)P is not liable for any offense as he did not order the dog to go to land of Q. The dog must be held liable as he went on his own will.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.Trespass can be defined as an unjustifiable physical interference of land in possession of one party by another. Under English common law where these principles of torts emanate, trespass does not form a criminal act but in the Indian Penal Code it has been given recognition i.e. under section 441 But it defines trespass as unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so. The Intention part is present due to it being under a criminal code where in 'mens rea' is a part.Under English Common Law the maxim that is used for trespass is 'trespass quare clausam fregit' which means "because he (the defendant) broke or entered into the close". The tort of trespass requires essentially only the possession of land by the plaintiff and encroachment by some way by the defendant. There requires no force, unlawful intention or damage nor the breaking of an enclosure. One of the most important ingredients of a tort of trespass is the fact that the land in question which has been encroached upon essentially needs to be in the direct possession of the plaintiff and not just mere physical presence on it. Another essential provision of the tort of trespass includes in the directness of the act. If the act is direct i.e. arising out of the natural consequences of the act of the defendant then it is valid. But trespass is encroachment upon property whereas nuisance is interference upon another's right to enjoy his property.Also if a person enters upon another's land and stays on it, the act is connoted as continuing trespass. Furthermore the owner of a land is entitled to the airspace above him but he is aerial trespass has a very important ingredient which is that the object that enters his land aerially should be at such height that it violates his right to enjoy his property and moreover violate his right of ordinary use of his land.The subject matter for an action is a notable point. Merely walking on a land possessed by the plaintiff forms a tort as it involves encroaching upon the legal right to own property. The general principle of subject matter was prescribed in the many cases. It was held that anything associated with the soil and which is capable of being possessed individually forms the subject matter in the tort. Therefore if there is any damage incurred upon any object which is associated with the land of the plaintiff an action in trespass may be instituted.Q. P has a pet dog Zambo. It has a tendency to go to Q's land which is adjacent to P′sP's. Despite knowing this P never chained Zambo and it always was let free. One day Zambo entered into the land of Q and attacked his pet kitten which died eventually. Q sued P.a)P is liable for trespass as there was negligence in taking care of the dog so as to enable them to enter onto land of Q.b)P is liable as its P's dog which entered into land of Q although it clearly proves that p had intention to make Zambo enter into the land.c)P is liable for nuisance as it is the dog which caused disturbance.d)P is not liable for any offense as he did not order the dog to go to land of Q. The dog must be held liable as he went on his own will.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.Trespass can be defined as an unjustifiable physical interference of land in possession of one party by another. Under English common law where these principles of torts emanate, trespass does not form a criminal act but in the Indian Penal Code it has been given recognition i.e. under section 441 But it defines trespass as unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so. The Intention part is present due to it being under a criminal code where in 'mens rea' is a part.Under English Common Law the maxim that is used for trespass is 'trespass quare clausam fregit' which means "because he (the defendant) broke or entered into the close". The tort of trespass requires essentially only the possession of land by the plaintiff and encroachment by some way by the defendant. There requires no force, unlawful intention or damage nor the breaking of an enclosure. One of the most important ingredients of a tort of trespass is the fact that the land in question which has been encroached upon essentially needs to be in the direct possession of the plaintiff and not just mere physical presence on it. Another essential provision of the tort of trespass includes in the directness of the act. If the act is direct i.e. arising out of the natural consequences of the act of the defendant then it is valid. But trespass is encroachment upon property whereas nuisance is interference upon another's right to enjoy his property.Also if a person enters upon another's land and stays on it, the act is connoted as continuing trespass. Furthermore the owner of a land is entitled to the airspace above him but he is aerial trespass has a very important ingredient which is that the object that enters his land aerially should be at such height that it violates his right to enjoy his property and moreover violate his right of ordinary use of his land.The subject matter for an action is a notable point. Merely walking on a land possessed by the plaintiff forms a tort as it involves encroaching upon the legal right to own property. The general principle of subject matter was prescribed in the many cases. It was held that anything associated with the soil and which is capable of being possessed individually forms the subject matter in the tort. Therefore if there is any damage incurred upon any object which is associated with the land of the plaintiff an action in trespass may be instituted.Q. P has a pet dog Zambo. It has a tendency to go to Q's land which is adjacent to P′sP's. Despite knowing this P never chained Zambo and it always was let free. One day Zambo entered into the land of Q and attacked his pet kitten which died eventually. Q sued P.a)P is liable for trespass as there was negligence in taking care of the dog so as to enable them to enter onto land of Q.b)P is liable as its P's dog which entered into land of Q although it clearly proves that p had intention to make Zambo enter into the land.c)P is liable for nuisance as it is the dog which caused disturbance.d)P is not liable for any offense as he did not order the dog to go to land of Q. The dog must be held liable as he went on his own will.Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.