Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > Principle – The master is liable for the wron...

Join the Discussion on the App

Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.

Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.

a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.

b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.

c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.

d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.

Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Test: Legal Reasoning - 1

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Most Upvoted Answer

Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant ...

Please read the Principal again. It's a wrongful act done by the servant (pradyuman) and the master (abhijit) is liable.

Answered by Glance Learning Institute · View profile

Free Test

FREE

Test: Legal Reasoning - 1
25 Ques | 25 Min

Start Free Test

View all free CLAT tests

Community Answer

Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant ...

The damage was caused while Pradyuman was driving the car to the jet cleaning area. This act is in the course of employment; therefore, the master would be liable.

Share via Whatsapp

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.

Legal Reasoning for CLAT

Lucent for GK

Current Affairs: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

CLAT Mock Test Series 2025

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment. Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.

View answer

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 doctrine of vicarious liability can also be termed as the heart of the common law system of tort. It acts as being saving clause for the inferior, who acts for the wrongful order of their superior that ultimately leads to the wrongful act under tort law.Generally, it is the rule that the person is liable for the wrongful acts done by himself and no one else would incur the liability for his act. But under certain circumstances, one person can be held liable for the acts done by the other and thats where the doctrine of vicarious liability lies. Thus, for example, where the wrongful act was done by B who was at that time working under A, then, in that condition, A would be held liable for the tortious liability as per this doctrine of vicarious liability. But to be held liable for this type of tort, it is necessary that there is a certain kind of relationship between the two and the act done should be in a certain way related to that relationship. There is certain scope of employment under which an employer could be held liable. Scope of employment refers to the actions of an employee within the terms of his employment. This employment varies depending on the specific requirements of the job the employee is hired to do.When a person has got the authority to perform a certain act but he authorises it to someone else working under him, this relationship is known as a principal-agent relationship. When the principal authorises an agent to perform some tortious act, the liability for that will not be only of that person who has committed it but also of that who has authorised it. It is based on the principle "Qui facit per alium facit per se", which means "the act of an agent is the act of the principal". Liability of both the principal and the agent is joint and several.At times, the master or the employer may knowingly employ a clearly incompetent person. Hence, if any fault is committed, then the master will still be responsible. Master may consciously fail to provide proper means for the performance of the allotted work, if the servant does a work in such a manner due to which anybody faces inconvenience would make the master liable. Individuals performing work for someone else, though not considered legal employees but independent contractors, are not working within the scope of employment for the sake of vicarious liability.Q.Rohan employs Modil as a forklift operator. While moving a large crate to the client loading zone, Modil hits a clients car thereby damaging it. The said client was there to meet Rohan. Modil was engaged in the duties allotted to him under his employment. The client filed a suit against Modil. Decide as per your understanding of the passage.

View answer

Directios: Questions 4 – 7 are based on the same set of Principles. Answer accordingly.Principle 1 – The Principal is liable for all acts of the agent done in the course of employment.Principle 2 – When a servant commits a mistake while acting on behalf of his master, causing loss to the plaintiff thereby, the master will be liable for the same.Principle 3 – Generally, the employer is not liable for torts committed by an independent contractor working for him.Exception – The employer will be held liable for the acts of an independent contractor if he authorizes the doing of an illegal act.Explanation – An independent contractor is one who is not under the complete direction and control of the employer.Principle 4 – If the servant acts negligently in the performance of his duties or displays reckless behaviour, thereby causing loss to the plaintiff, the master will be held liable.Principle 5 – If the servant does an act in defiance of an express prohibition, and the act is outside the course of employment, then the master cannot be held liable for harm arising out of such an act.Facts – Ojaswi is an old woman who lives alone in the outskirts of the city. Every month, she has to deposit a sum of Rs. 2000 in the nearby branch of the State Bank of Shamirpet. Pranesh, her neighbour, works as a teller at that branch and offers to deposit the money for her. Trustingly, Ojaswi hands him themoney at the end of the month and asks him to deposit it in her bank account. Pranesh never gave her a receipt stating that the amount had been deposited, but made false entries in her passbook nonetheless. Six months later, it is brought to her notice that Pranesh has been misappropriating all the money. She wishes to sue the State Bank of Shamirpet and claim damages for her loss. Would the Bank be liable?

View answer

This Questions based on a common set of principles and facts. Answer accordingly.Principle 1: Any person (Principal) authorizing another person (Agent) to do a certain act will be liable for all acts of such person done within the course of employment. The tests of control and direction must be complied with.Principle 2: A wrongful act authorized by the Principal as well as a lawful act done in a wrongful manner would be considered to have been within the course of employment unless specific directions were given regarding the mode of performance of the act.Principle 3: For an act to fall outside the scope of employment, the act should either have been performed after the authorized act had come to an end or must be of such nature that it can be completely divorced from the authorized act.Principle 4: Such a relationship need not be a long term arrangement and can be set up for one specific transaction.Facts: Aggubai instructed her long standing childhood friend Annubai to go to Palampur and strike a deal with Tagesh, a spirit supplier, for the purchase of 1000 bottles of McDowell‘s No.1 whisky, which Aggubai intended to sell at her retail store in Mumbai. Annubai was also instructed to keep in touch with Aggubai over phone regarding the deal. Accordingly, Annubai took a train to Palampur, planned a meeting with Tagesh and made the requisite purchase.Q.On her way back, Annubai decided to drive down for a part of the journey as her friend Bhavinder told her it was a scenic drive. Annubai got tempted and downed 4 bottles of whisky in the car. Owing to her inebriated state, Annubai sped and her car ran into a family of three sleeping on the footpath. Who will be liable for the accident?

View answer

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 doctrine of vicarious liability can also be termed as the heart of the common law system of tort. It acts as being saving clause for the inferior, who acts for the wrongful order of their superior that ultimately leads to the wrongful act under tort law.Generally, it is the rule that the person is liable for the wrongful acts done by himself and no one else would incur the liability for his act. But under certain circumstances, one person can be held liable for the acts done by the other and thats where the doctrine of vicarious liability lies. Thus, for example, where the wrongful act was done by B who was at that time working under A, then, in that condition, A would be held liable for the tortious liability as per this doctrine of vicarious liability. But to be held liable for this type of tort, it is necessary that there is a certain kind of relationship between the two and the act done should be in a certain way related to that relationship. There is certain scope of employment under which an employer could be held liable. Scope of employment refers to the actions of an employee within the terms of his employment. This employment varies depending on the specific requirements of the job the employee is hired to do.When a person has got the authority to perform a certain act but he authorises it to someone else working under him, this relationship is known as a principal-agent relationship. When the principal authorises an agent to perform some tortious act, the liability for that will not be only of that person who has committed it but also of that who has authorised it. It is based on the principle "Qui facit per alium facit per se", which means "the act of an agent is the act of the principal". Liability of both the principal and the agent is joint and several.At times, the master or the employer may knowingly employ a clearly incompetent person. Hence, if any fault is committed, then the master will still be responsible. Master may consciously fail to provide proper means for the performance of the allotted work, if the servant does a work in such a manner due to which anybody faces inconvenience would make the master liable. Individuals performing work for someone else, though not considered legal employees but independent contractors, are not working within the scope of employment for the sake of vicarious liability.Q.Aman asked Ramu, his servant, to light a bonfire in the garden and for that, Aman neither instructed him nor gave any means to light the bonfire. Ramu lit the bonfire using his own technique, due to which Amans neighbour had inconvenience. Will Aman be liable?

View answer

Top Courses for CLATView all

Legal Reasoning for CLAT

Lucent for GK

Current Affairs: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

CLAT Mock Test Series 2025

Crash Course for CLAT

Top Courses for CLAT

View all

Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct 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 Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct 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 Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct 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 Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Principle – The master is liable for the wrongful acts of the servant done in the course of employment.Facts – Pradyuman is a mechanic working in the car mechanics shop owned by Abhjit. Pallavi wants her Audi A8 to be serviced and cleaned, as she is planning to go on a long drive soon. She drops off the car at the mechanic‘s, and asks Pradyuman to have it ready in two days. Pradyuman, while trying to drive the car to the jet-cleaning area, accidentally bumps it against the wall and a dent is created on the car door. When Pallavi comes to take her serviced car, she is livid at the condition in which it is returned to her, and wishes to sue for damages.a)Only Pradyuman will be liable as he has caused the damage to the car.b)Both Pradyuman and Abhijit will be jointly liable.c)Abhijit will be liable to pay damages, as Pradhyuman is his servant and the damage was caused in the course of employment.d)Pallavi will not be entitled to claim damages as she should not have given her car to a small mechanic such as Abhijit.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.

Explore Courses for CLAT exam