LAW of TORTS

Join law entrance exam ;

https://t.me/lawentranceexam2021

Join du public group ; https://t.me/dullbentrancegroup

Topic Law of torts

No. Of questions 25

Maximum marks 100

Time duration 15minutes

Answers are provided in this file for self-evaluation.

1. A master is liable for the wrongs committed by his

servants. It is called a. Joint liability
b. Vicarious liability
c. Concurrent liability
d. All the above
2. In law of Torts, always unliquidated damages are
awarded. The meaning of unliquidated is a. Not
ascertainable
b. Approximately arrived at
c. Penal & exemplary
d. Both (a) and (b) above

3. The Law of Torts has largely developed through

a. Judicial decisions
b. Customs
c. Legislations
d. None of the above

4. ______are words which appear innocent, but contain a

latent meaning which is defamatory a. Libel
b. Slander
c. Innuendoes
d. None of the above

5. In an action for negligence, the plaintiff has to prove:

a. Existence of a duty
b. Breach of duty by defendant
c. Legal injury because of breach
d. All of the above
6. If a newspaper published a defamatory article
written by `X’, who can be sued?
a. Publisher of that newspaper
b. Printer of that newspaper
c. Mr. X only
d. Mr. X, Printer, Publisher and Editor

7. ______ is an act which is twisted, crooked, which is not

straight and lawful a. Tort
b. Crime
c. Wrong
d. None of the above

8. In criminal law intention is an essential constituent of

offence. In Law of Torts a. Intention is relevant
b. Intention is irrelevant
c. Intention is relevant only in some torts
d. None of the above

9. Defamation infringes a person’s right to

a. Reputation
b. Pride
c. Privilege
d. Status

10. The act of unlawfully entering into another’s property

a. Breach of property
b. Trespass
c. Triplication
d. Trover

11. The law of torts deals with

a. Injuries to person or property caused by failure to take
reasonable care
b. Money transactions
c. Partnerships
d. Industrial production

12. Assertion (A) None should make unnatural use of his

land.
Reason (R) It may prove fatal for the public at large. a.
Both A and R are true
b. Both A and R are false
c. A is true R is false
d. R is true A is false.

13. Assertion (A) When right of a private individual has

been infringed by other individual, it is called tort.

Reason (R) When right of public at large has been

infringed it is called crime.
a. Both A and R are true but R is not correct
explanation of
A
b. Both A and R are true and R is correct explanation of A
c. Both A and R are false
d. A is true R is false

14. Which of the following is not correctly matched?

a. ubi Jus ibi – Where there is a right there is damage
b. res ipsa loquitur – things speak for themselves
c. damnum sine injuria – damage without injury
d. injuria sine damnum – injury without damage

15. Slander is a ______

a. a crime
b. a tort
c. a breach of contract
d. a breach of trust

16. Principle: If a professional doesn’t take care like an

ordinary prudent person, he is guilty of negligence and
shall have to pay compensation to those who suffer.

Fact: Kapoor, a businessman appointed a surgeon Dr. K.S.

Pratap for completing surgery to remove deformation in
the leg of his son, Amit. During the surgery an attendant
nurse left a small needle inside, which resulted in a serious
abyss requiring second operation. After the second
operation, leg was shortened. Has the doctor
committed any wrong?
a. No, he has not committed any wrong; it was the nurse
who was negligent.
b. No, he has not committed any wrong; as such lapses are
common in surgeries.
c. Yes, the doctor is guilty of medical negligence, as there
is absence of due care
d. Yes, both the doctor as well as the nurse is liable.

17. Principle : No one is responsible for unforeseen

circumstances, but liable for not taking due care.

Fact: Rahul, aged about 19 years, was playing cricket with

his friends in housing societies lane where they live. While
playing he made a good shot, which hit a window of a new
Maruti car and broke the window. Has Rahul to pay for?

a. No, Rahul is not responsible, as it is common for boys to

play street cricket.
b. Yes, Rahul is liable, as breaking window is a predictable
consequence of playing cricket on streets.
c. Yes, Rahul is liable, as he hit the shot which broke
the window.
d. No, All the boys are liable to pay, not just Rahul.

18. Principle : Servant’s negligence is master’s

responsibility.

Fact: In a shopping complex, Amir Ali has dry fruits shop in

the basement. The shopping complex remained closed on
Saturday. Abeera Co. manages the complex. The watchman
forgot to close the wheel of reservoir on Friday night and
the water overflowed. No one noticed that incident. The
water damaged the fruits in the shop of Amir Ali. From
whom, if any, Amir Ali may recover his loss?
a. Amir Ali should sue the watchman, as he was directly
responsible
b. Amir Ali should sue Abeera & Co. for the watchman’s
negligence
c. Amir Ali cannot sue anybody, as his shop is in the
basement.
d. Nobody is responsible to Amir Ali

19. Principle : Without lawful authority, if a person is

restricted from moving in a direction in which he is entitled
to move, it amounts to an offence of wrongful restraint.
Fact: In view of the religious procession scheduled to

be taken through the streets of the

city, police erected barricades on the main road to

prevent the traffic movement. Consequently, “A” who had
to reach the airport couldn’t reach in time.
a. A can succeed, as the barricades on the road
prevented him from moving freely.
b. A cannot succeed as religious processions are always
authorized by the Government.
c. A can succeed, as he was not informed about the
procession earlier.
d. A cannot succeed, as the barricades were installed
under lawful authority

20. Principle : A master is liable for the acts committed by

his servant in the course of employment.

Fact: “A” instructs his driver “B” to drive his vehicle from
the office back to home. He is also instructed not to carry
any unauthorized person in the car. “B” one day while
driving empty car back to home picks up his friend, “C”,
who stays close to A’s house. In the course of driving the
car towards A’s house, he collides with a vehicle.”C” is
injured in the accident. Is A liable to compensate to C?
a. A shall be liable, because B was in the course of
employment at the time of accident
b. A shall not be liable, B was not in the course of
employment when he took C inside the car.

c. C got into the car at his own risk, and therefore, he

cannot sue anybody.
d. A shall not be liable, as he had instructed B not to give
lift to unauthorized persons.

21. Principle : The owner of a land is entitled to the

column of air space above the surface ad infinitum. But,
the right is restricted to such height as is necessary for the
ordinary use and employment of his land, and the structure
on it. Fact:A had constructed a single-storeyed house on a
corner site. He had no intention of building an additional
floor. B his neighbour, who ran an internet parlour got a
hoarding made, which protruded over A’s house at a height
of around 6 feet above the terrace. A sues B for trespass.
a. A will succeed since B’s act amounts to trespass.
b. A will not succeed since he was anyway not planning
to build and additional storey.
c. A will not succeed since the hoarding is not
obstructing him.
d. A will not succeed since B has a right to erect a
hoarding.
22. Principle: It is settled principle that an occupier
should not do a dangerous act without adequate warning
if he knows or suspects that a trespasser is present.
Factual Situation: ‘A’ was cutting a large tree on his land.
Some boys were fooling about nearby. ‘A’ paid no attention
as the boys were clearly trespassers, when the tree fell,
one of the boys was hit by a falling branch and suffered
injury.
a. The boy was illegally present and cannot have the
protection of law.
b. ‘A’ was liable as he did not give warning of the danger
likely to arise by the felling of tree although he knew that
the boy was present.
c. ‘A’ is not liable as there is no duty to do good and
warning a person who was illegally on the premises.
d. ‘A’ was carrying out his lawful profession on his own
land and anyone came there, at his peril. Hence ‘A’ was not
liable.

23. Principle: Damages can be recovered for nervous

shock.
Facts:Avinash on April 1st as a joke falsely told Balu
that his father met with an accident and was injured
seriously.
By reason of this misrepresentation, Balu suffered aviolent
shock and his hair turned grey and his life was for some time
in great danger. Later, Balu intends to file suit against
Avinsah. Advise
a. Balu can successfully plead the case on grounds of
nervous shock
b. Balu cannot be successful in his suit, for he should have
known that it is common for people to play such pranks
on
April 1st
c. Balu cannot be successful, as his nerves are really weak.
d. None of these

24. Principle: The employer is liable to pay compensation

for the injuries suffered by his workers, if the accident has
arisen out of and in the course of employment. The
liability is absolute and the employer will not have any
defences if the accident results in death or total
disablement.
Facts: Mr. Tharun is working as an unskilled worker in the
furniture fabricating industry run by Mr. Omar in
Bangalore. While Mr. Tharun and his co-workers were
working on the preparation of a double decker iron cot, the
thick iron sheet fell on the head of Mr. Tharun. He suffered
serious head injuries. He was hospitalized and he died
in the hospital. In the Government Hospital, where
Mr.Tharun was admitted, the doctors delayed attending Mr.
Tharun. It was also found out in the course of treatment
that Mr.Tharun was drunk at the time when the accident
occurred.
a. The hospital and the Government are liable to pay
compensation to the dependents of Mr. Tharun as there
was negligence on the part of the doctors.
b. Mr. Omar is not liable to pay any compensation to the
dependents of Mr. Tharun as he was drunk at the time of
the accident.
c. Mr. Omar is liable to pay compensation as per the law to
the dependents of Mr. Tharun.
d. Mr. Omar can argue that the drunken condition of Mr.
Tharun is the reason for his death.

25. PRINCIPLE : A tort-feasor(wrong-doer) is liable if

intended consequences of his act are evidently
foreseeable.
FACTS: Marcus threw an ignited missile into a crowded
market place. The fiery missile came down the shed of a
vendor of ginger bread who in order to protect himself,
caught it dexterously and threw it away from him. It then
fell on the shed of another merchant, who in order to
protect himself passed it on precisely in the same way,
till at last it burst in Brutus’s face and put his eye out.
Brutus sued Marcus. Decide.

a. Marcus is not liable as he did not foresee the injury

suffered by Brutus.
b. Marcus is liable as he intentionally threw the missile
into the market place.
c. Marcus is not liable as it was the merchant who
ultimately threw the missile on Brutus.
d. Marcus is not liable as the injury suffered by Brutus is
of a remote consequence.

ANSWERS ON NEXT PAGE

 Answer key

Contact – dev 6261969219