Question Description
Principle – Volenti non fit injuria - No remedy can be claimed for harm caused through voluntary consent.​Facts – On a hot, sunny day, Avtar Singh, a traffic policeman wishes to take a break from his work on the Jangpura-Jayanagar junction. He sees a grocery store nearby, and decides to buy some refreshments. To get to the grocery store, he must cross the busy road first. While doing so, he sees that a child has suddenly jumped down from the pavement on the other side, and is attempting to cross the road, despite vehicles hurtling past at a high speed. On seeing an approaching car that the child does not seem to be aware of, Avtar lunges forward and pushes the child out of the way. However, the driver of the car, Mr. Takwani, is unable to stop the car in time and hits Avtar, who sustains serious injuries, including a torn ligament. This means that Avtar will not be able to perform his duties as a traffic policeman for at least six months. He wishes to sue Takwani and claim damages for his loss in income, but Takwani asserts that there was a green light, and he had committed no fault in driving at a reasonable speed. It was Avtar who had suddenly lunged forward, giving him no time to apply the brakes! Decide.a)Avtar voluntarily lunged forward to save the child from being hit by the approaching car, fully aware that there were vehicles approaching at high speeds. Therefore, he cannot claim damages.b)Avtar had no option but to put himself in harm‘s way, and save the innocent child. Takwani should have been more careful while driving, and hence, he must pay damages for the harm suffered by Avtar.c)Avtar was being unnecessarily noble, his act was entirely voluntary, so he cannot claim any damages.d)Takwani was at fault, and must be prosecuted for rash and reckless driving.Ans. ACorrect answer is option 'A'. 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 Principle – Volenti non fit injuria - No remedy can be claimed for harm caused through voluntary consent.​Facts – On a hot, sunny day, Avtar Singh, a traffic policeman wishes to take a break from his work on the Jangpura-Jayanagar junction. He sees a grocery store nearby, and decides to buy some refreshments. To get to the grocery store, he must cross the busy road first. While doing so, he sees that a child has suddenly jumped down from the pavement on the other side, and is attempting to cross the road, despite vehicles hurtling past at a high speed. On seeing an approaching car that the child does not seem to be aware of, Avtar lunges forward and pushes the child out of the way. However, the driver of the car, Mr. Takwani, is unable to stop the car in time and hits Avtar, who sustains serious injuries, including a torn ligament. This means that Avtar will not be able to perform his duties as a traffic policeman for at least six months. He wishes to sue Takwani and claim damages for his loss in income, but Takwani asserts that there was a green light, and he had committed no fault in driving at a reasonable speed. It was Avtar who had suddenly lunged forward, giving him no time to apply the brakes! Decide.a)Avtar voluntarily lunged forward to save the child from being hit by the approaching car, fully aware that there were vehicles approaching at high speeds. Therefore, he cannot claim damages.b)Avtar had no option but to put himself in harm‘s way, and save the innocent child. Takwani should have been more careful while driving, and hence, he must pay damages for the harm suffered by Avtar.c)Avtar was being unnecessarily noble, his act was entirely voluntary, so he cannot claim any damages.d)Takwani was at fault, and must be prosecuted for rash and reckless driving.Ans. ACorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Principle – Volenti non fit injuria - No remedy can be claimed for harm caused through voluntary consent.​Facts – On a hot, sunny day, Avtar Singh, a traffic policeman wishes to take a break from his work on the Jangpura-Jayanagar junction. He sees a grocery store nearby, and decides to buy some refreshments. To get to the grocery store, he must cross the busy road first. While doing so, he sees that a child has suddenly jumped down from the pavement on the other side, and is attempting to cross the road, despite vehicles hurtling past at a high speed. On seeing an approaching car that the child does not seem to be aware of, Avtar lunges forward and pushes the child out of the way. However, the driver of the car, Mr. Takwani, is unable to stop the car in time and hits Avtar, who sustains serious injuries, including a torn ligament. This means that Avtar will not be able to perform his duties as a traffic policeman for at least six months. He wishes to sue Takwani and claim damages for his loss in income, but Takwani asserts that there was a green light, and he had committed no fault in driving at a reasonable speed. It was Avtar who had suddenly lunged forward, giving him no time to apply the brakes! Decide.a)Avtar voluntarily lunged forward to save the child from being hit by the approaching car, fully aware that there were vehicles approaching at high speeds. Therefore, he cannot claim damages.b)Avtar had no option but to put himself in harm‘s way, and save the innocent child. Takwani should have been more careful while driving, and hence, he must pay damages for the harm suffered by Avtar.c)Avtar was being unnecessarily noble, his act was entirely voluntary, so he cannot claim any damages.d)Takwani was at fault, and must be prosecuted for rash and reckless driving.Ans. ACorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Principle – Volenti non fit injuria - No remedy can be claimed for harm caused through voluntary consent.​Facts – On a hot, sunny day, Avtar Singh, a traffic policeman wishes to take a break from his work on the Jangpura-Jayanagar junction. He sees a grocery store nearby, and decides to buy some refreshments. To get to the grocery store, he must cross the busy road first. While doing so, he sees that a child has suddenly jumped down from the pavement on the other side, and is attempting to cross the road, despite vehicles hurtling past at a high speed. On seeing an approaching car that the child does not seem to be aware of, Avtar lunges forward and pushes the child out of the way. However, the driver of the car, Mr. Takwani, is unable to stop the car in time and hits Avtar, who sustains serious injuries, including a torn ligament. This means that Avtar will not be able to perform his duties as a traffic policeman for at least six months. He wishes to sue Takwani and claim damages for his loss in income, but Takwani asserts that there was a green light, and he had committed no fault in driving at a reasonable speed. It was Avtar who had suddenly lunged forward, giving him no time to apply the brakes! Decide.a)Avtar voluntarily lunged forward to save the child from being hit by the approaching car, fully aware that there were vehicles approaching at high speeds. Therefore, he cannot claim damages.b)Avtar had no option but to put himself in harm‘s way, and save the innocent child. Takwani should have been more careful while driving, and hence, he must pay damages for the harm suffered by Avtar.c)Avtar was being unnecessarily noble, his act was entirely voluntary, so he cannot claim any damages.d)Takwani was at fault, and must be prosecuted for rash and reckless driving.Ans. ACorrect 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 Principle – Volenti non fit injuria - No remedy can be claimed for harm caused through voluntary consent.​Facts – On a hot, sunny day, Avtar Singh, a traffic policeman wishes to take a break from his work on the Jangpura-Jayanagar junction. He sees a grocery store nearby, and decides to buy some refreshments. To get to the grocery store, he must cross the busy road first. While doing so, he sees that a child has suddenly jumped down from the pavement on the other side, and is attempting to cross the road, despite vehicles hurtling past at a high speed. On seeing an approaching car that the child does not seem to be aware of, Avtar lunges forward and pushes the child out of the way. However, the driver of the car, Mr. Takwani, is unable to stop the car in time and hits Avtar, who sustains serious injuries, including a torn ligament. This means that Avtar will not be able to perform his duties as a traffic policeman for at least six months. He wishes to sue Takwani and claim damages for his loss in income, but Takwani asserts that there was a green light, and he had committed no fault in driving at a reasonable speed. It was Avtar who had suddenly lunged forward, giving him no time to apply the brakes! Decide.a)Avtar voluntarily lunged forward to save the child from being hit by the approaching car, fully aware that there were vehicles approaching at high speeds. Therefore, he cannot claim damages.b)Avtar had no option but to put himself in harm‘s way, and save the innocent child. Takwani should have been more careful while driving, and hence, he must pay damages for the harm suffered by Avtar.c)Avtar was being unnecessarily noble, his act was entirely voluntary, so he cannot claim any damages.d)Takwani was at fault, and must be prosecuted for rash and reckless driving.Ans. ACorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Principle – Volenti non fit injuria - No remedy can be claimed for harm caused through voluntary consent.​Facts – On a hot, sunny day, Avtar Singh, a traffic policeman wishes to take a break from his work on the Jangpura-Jayanagar junction. He sees a grocery store nearby, and decides to buy some refreshments. To get to the grocery store, he must cross the busy road first. While doing so, he sees that a child has suddenly jumped down from the pavement on the other side, and is attempting to cross the road, despite vehicles hurtling past at a high speed. On seeing an approaching car that the child does not seem to be aware of, Avtar lunges forward and pushes the child out of the way. However, the driver of the car, Mr. Takwani, is unable to stop the car in time and hits Avtar, who sustains serious injuries, including a torn ligament. This means that Avtar will not be able to perform his duties as a traffic policeman for at least six months. He wishes to sue Takwani and claim damages for his loss in income, but Takwani asserts that there was a green light, and he had committed no fault in driving at a reasonable speed. It was Avtar who had suddenly lunged forward, giving him no time to apply the brakes! Decide.a)Avtar voluntarily lunged forward to save the child from being hit by the approaching car, fully aware that there were vehicles approaching at high speeds. Therefore, he cannot claim damages.b)Avtar had no option but to put himself in harm‘s way, and save the innocent child. Takwani should have been more careful while driving, and hence, he must pay damages for the harm suffered by Avtar.c)Avtar was being unnecessarily noble, his act was entirely voluntary, so he cannot claim any damages.d)Takwani was at fault, and must be prosecuted for rash and reckless driving.Ans. ACorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Principle – Volenti non fit injuria - No remedy can be claimed for harm caused through voluntary consent.​Facts – On a hot, sunny day, Avtar Singh, a traffic policeman wishes to take a break from his work on the Jangpura-Jayanagar junction. He sees a grocery store nearby, and decides to buy some refreshments. To get to the grocery store, he must cross the busy road first. While doing so, he sees that a child has suddenly jumped down from the pavement on the other side, and is attempting to cross the road, despite vehicles hurtling past at a high speed. On seeing an approaching car that the child does not seem to be aware of, Avtar lunges forward and pushes the child out of the way. However, the driver of the car, Mr. Takwani, is unable to stop the car in time and hits Avtar, who sustains serious injuries, including a torn ligament. This means that Avtar will not be able to perform his duties as a traffic policeman for at least six months. He wishes to sue Takwani and claim damages for his loss in income, but Takwani asserts that there was a green light, and he had committed no fault in driving at a reasonable speed. It was Avtar who had suddenly lunged forward, giving him no time to apply the brakes! Decide.a)Avtar voluntarily lunged forward to save the child from being hit by the approaching car, fully aware that there were vehicles approaching at high speeds. Therefore, he cannot claim damages.b)Avtar had no option but to put himself in harm‘s way, and save the innocent child. Takwani should have been more careful while driving, and hence, he must pay damages for the harm suffered by Avtar.c)Avtar was being unnecessarily noble, his act was entirely voluntary, so he cannot claim any damages.d)Takwani was at fault, and must be prosecuted for rash and reckless driving.Ans. ACorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Principle – Volenti non fit injuria - No remedy can be claimed for harm caused through voluntary consent.​Facts – On a hot, sunny day, Avtar Singh, a traffic policeman wishes to take a break from his work on the Jangpura-Jayanagar junction. He sees a grocery store nearby, and decides to buy some refreshments. To get to the grocery store, he must cross the busy road first. While doing so, he sees that a child has suddenly jumped down from the pavement on the other side, and is attempting to cross the road, despite vehicles hurtling past at a high speed. On seeing an approaching car that the child does not seem to be aware of, Avtar lunges forward and pushes the child out of the way. However, the driver of the car, Mr. Takwani, is unable to stop the car in time and hits Avtar, who sustains serious injuries, including a torn ligament. This means that Avtar will not be able to perform his duties as a traffic policeman for at least six months. He wishes to sue Takwani and claim damages for his loss in income, but Takwani asserts that there was a green light, and he had committed no fault in driving at a reasonable speed. It was Avtar who had suddenly lunged forward, giving him no time to apply the brakes! Decide.a)Avtar voluntarily lunged forward to save the child from being hit by the approaching car, fully aware that there were vehicles approaching at high speeds. Therefore, he cannot claim damages.b)Avtar had no option but to put himself in harm‘s way, and save the innocent child. Takwani should have been more careful while driving, and hence, he must pay damages for the harm suffered by Avtar.c)Avtar was being unnecessarily noble, his act was entirely voluntary, so he cannot claim any damages.d)Takwani was at fault, and must be prosecuted for rash and reckless driving.Ans. ACorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Principle – Volenti non fit injuria - No remedy can be claimed for harm caused through voluntary consent.​Facts – On a hot, sunny day, Avtar Singh, a traffic policeman wishes to take a break from his work on the Jangpura-Jayanagar junction. He sees a grocery store nearby, and decides to buy some refreshments. To get to the grocery store, he must cross the busy road first. While doing so, he sees that a child has suddenly jumped down from the pavement on the other side, and is attempting to cross the road, despite vehicles hurtling past at a high speed. On seeing an approaching car that the child does not seem to be aware of, Avtar lunges forward and pushes the child out of the way. However, the driver of the car, Mr. Takwani, is unable to stop the car in time and hits Avtar, who sustains serious injuries, including a torn ligament. This means that Avtar will not be able to perform his duties as a traffic policeman for at least six months. He wishes to sue Takwani and claim damages for his loss in income, but Takwani asserts that there was a green light, and he had committed no fault in driving at a reasonable speed. It was Avtar who had suddenly lunged forward, giving him no time to apply the brakes! Decide.a)Avtar voluntarily lunged forward to save the child from being hit by the approaching car, fully aware that there were vehicles approaching at high speeds. Therefore, he cannot claim damages.b)Avtar had no option but to put himself in harm‘s way, and save the innocent child. Takwani should have been more careful while driving, and hence, he must pay damages for the harm suffered by Avtar.c)Avtar was being unnecessarily noble, his act was entirely voluntary, so he cannot claim any damages.d)Takwani was at fault, and must be prosecuted for rash and reckless driving.Ans. ACorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.