All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a ret... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y will
  • a)
    Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.
  • b)
    Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturer
  • c)
    Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with him
  • d)
    Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contract
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Most Upvoted Answer
Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was con...
Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y will Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with him.
Hence option 3 is the right answer.
Attention CLAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CLAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CLAT.
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The 2019 Act has brought in some major changes and provides for more protection to the consumers in pari materia to the earlier 1986 Act which can be seen from the comprehensive definition provided for the terms consumer and unfair trade practice. The 2019 Act expands the scope of the definition of consumer so as to include the consumers involved in online transactions and it now squarely covers the e-commerce businesses within its ambit. The 2019 Act has also widened the definition of unfair trade practices as compared to the 1986 Act which now includes within its ambit online misleading advertisements; the practice of not issuing bill/memo for the goods and services; failing to take back defective goods or deactivate defective services and refund the amount within the stipulated time mentioned in the bill or memo or within 30 days in the absence of such stipulation; and disclosing personal information of a consumer unless such disclosure is in accordance with law.The 2019 Act has also introduced the concept of unfair contract which includes those contracts which favour the manufacturers or service providers and are against the interest of the consumers such as contracts requiring manifestly excessive security deposits to be given by a consumer for the performance of contractual obligations; imposing any penalty on the consumer for a breach of the contract, which is wholly disproportionate to the loss occurred due to such breach to the other party to the contract. Such unfair consumer contracts are now covered under the 2019 Act and a complaint in this regard can now be filed by a consumer.Another major introduction in the 2019 Act is the concept of product liability which covers within its ambit the product manufacturer, product service provider and product seller, for any claim for compensation. The term product liability is defined by the 2019 Act as the responsibility of a product manufacturer or product seller, of any product or service, related to the product to compensate for any harm caused to a consumer by such defective product manufactured or sold or by deficiency in services relating to the product. Also, the product seller has now been defined to include a person who is involved in placing the product for a commercial purpose and as such would include e-commerce platforms as well. Therefore, the ground commonly taken by e-commerce websites that they merely act as platforms or aggregators will now not be tenable before the court anymore. There are increased liability risks for manufacturers as compared to product service providers and product sellers, considering that under the 2019 Act, manufacturers will be liable in product liability action even where they successfully prove that they were not negligent or fraudulent in making the express warranty of a product. However, certain exceptions have been provided under the 2019 Act from liability claims, such as, that the product seller will not be liable where the product has been misused, altered or modified.Q.A milk company, selling Parag milk packets of 500 ml, actually delivers only 400 ml through its retailer. The buyer wants compensation. Decide.

The question is based on the reasoning and arguments, or facts and principles set out in the passage. Some of these principles may not be true in the real or legal sense, yet you must conclusively assume that they are true for the purpose. Please answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage. Do not rely on any principle of law other than the ones supplied to you, and do not assume any facts other than those supplied to you when answering the question. Please choose the option that most accurately and comprehensively answers the question.The 2019 Act has brought in some major changes and provides for more protection to the consumers in pari materia to the earlier 1986 Act which can be seen from the comprehensive definition provided for the terms consumer and unfair trade practice. The 2019 Act expands the scope of the definition of consumer so as to include the consumers involved in online transactions and it now squarely covers the e-commerce businesses within its ambit. The 2019 Act has also widened the definition of unfair trade practices as compared to the 1986 Act which now includes within its ambit online misleading advertisements; the practice of not issuing bill/memo for the goods and services; failing to take back defective goods or deactivate defective services and refund the amount within the stipulated time mentioned in the bill or memo or within 30 days in the absence of such stipulation; and disclosing personal information of a consumer unless such disclosure is in accordance with law.The 2019 Act has also introduced the concept of unfair contract which includes those contracts which favour the manufacturers or service providers and are against the interest of the consumers such as contracts requiring manifestly excessive security deposits to be given by a consumer for the performance of contractual obligations; imposing any penalty on the consumer for a breach of the contract, which is wholly disproportionate to the loss occurred due to such breach to the other party to the contract. Such unfair consumer contracts are now covered under the 2019 Act and a complaint in this regard can now be filed by a consumer.Another major introduction in the 2019 Act is the concept of product liability which covers within its ambit the product manufacturer, product service provider and product seller, for any claim for compensation. The term product liability is defined by the 2019 Act as the responsibility of a product manufacturer or product seller, of any product or service, related to the product to compensate for any harm caused to a consumer by such defective product manufactured or sold or by deficiency in services relating to the product. Also, the product seller has now been defined to include a person who is involved in placing the product for a commercial purpose and as such would include e-commerce platforms as well. Therefore, the ground commonly taken by e-commerce websites that they merely act as platforms or aggregators will now not be tenable before the court anymore. There are increased liability risks for manufacturers as compared to product service providers and product sellers, considering that under the 2019 Act, manufacturers will be liable in product liability action even where they successfully prove that they were not negligent or fraudulent in making the express warranty of a product. However, certain exceptions have been provided under the 2019 Act from liability claims, such as, that the product seller will not be liable where the product has been misused, altered or modified.Q.A strawberry flavoured protein shake was manufactured by "Shakes n Shop". The protein shake was meant to be taken with just curd. Sonia took the shake with milk and got a sore throat. Sonia filed a suit against "Shakes n Shop". Decide.

PRINCIPLE: Negligence is a breach of duty or a failure of one party to exercise the standard of care required by law, resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. A plaintiff can take civil action against the respondent, if the respondent’s negligence causes the plaintiff injury or loss of property.FACTS: D went to a café and ordered and paid for a tin/can of soft drink. The tin was opaque, and, therefore, the contents could not be seen from outside. She consumed some of the contents and then lifted the tin to pour the remainder of the content into a tumbler. The remains of a snail in decomposed state dropped out of the tin into the tumbler. D later complained of a stomach pain and her doctor diagnosed her as having gastroenteritis and being in a state of severe shock. She sued the manufacturer of the drink for negligence.Q. Applying the afore-stated principle which of the following derivations is CORRECT as regards liability of the manufacturer in the given situation?

PRINCIPLE: Negligence is a breach of duty or a failure of one party to exercise the standard of care required by law, resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. A plaintiff can take civil action against the respondent, if the respondent’s negligence causes the plaintiff injury or loss of property.FACTS: D went to a café and ordered and paid for a tin/can of soft drink. The tin was opaque, and, therefore, the contents could not be seen from outside. She consumed some of the contents and then lifted the tin to pour the remainder of the content into a tumbler. The remains of a snail in decomposed state dropped out of the tin into the tumbler. D later complained of a stomach pain and her doctor diagnosed her as having gastroenteritis and being in a state of severe shock. She sued the manufacturer of the drink for negligence.Q. Applying the afore-stated principle which of the following derivations is CORRECT as regards liability of the manufacturer in the given situation?

Top Courses for CLATView all

Top Courses for CLAT

Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect 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 Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Y purchases a bottle of cold drink from a retailer. The bottle was contaminated and Y fell ill after drinking it. Y brings a suit for damages against the manufacturer of the cold drink. Y willa)Not succeed because, the manufacturer had no duty to Y.b)Not succeed because Y did not have any contractual relation with the manufacturerc)Succeed against the manufacturer even in the absence of a contract with himd)Not succeed, his remedy is only against the retailer with whom he entered into a contractCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Follow Us
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup