Bihar Judiciary Mock Test 6 — Questions & Solutions
Every question from this prelims mock with the correct answer and a detailed, source-backed solution. Free to read. Want the real exam feel — a timer, instant scoring, and a subject-wise weakness report? Take it as a test.
250
Questions
6
Subjects
+ solutions
Every question
Take this as a timed mock test — instant score + subject-wise analytics. First mock free, then ₹999/year for unlimited.
Under the Constitution of India, the maximum age of retirement for a Judge of a High Court is
a60 years
b65 years
c62 years
d70 years
Answer: C
Article 217 of the Constitution provides that a High Court Judge holds office until the age of 62 years, while a Supreme Court Judge retires at 65 under Article 124.
Which Emperor of the Mauryan dynasty, who ruled from Pataliputra (modern Patna), embraced Buddhism after the Kalinga War?
aAshoka
bBindusara
cChandragupta Maurya
dBrihadratha
Answer: A
Ashoka, the Mauryan emperor who ruled from Pataliputra, adopted Buddhism after the bloodshed of the Kalinga War and propagated dhamma through his edicts.
The gas predominantly responsible for the greenhouse effect and global warming, released largely from burning of fossil fuels, is
aCarbon dioxide
bNitrogen
cOxygen
dHydrogen
Answer: A
Carbon dioxide is the principal anthropogenic greenhouse gas, emitted mainly through combustion of fossil fuels, contributing significantly to global warming.
Which one of the following is the largest gland in the human body?
aPancreas
bThyroid
cLiver
dPituitary
Answer: C
The liver is the largest gland as well as the largest internal organ in the human body, performing functions such as bile secretion and detoxification.
In November 2025, Nitish Kumar was sworn in as the Chief Minister of Bihar. This oath marked his tenure as Chief Minister for which number of times?
a8th time
b9th time
c11th time
d10th time
Answer: D
Following the 2025 Bihar Assembly election, Nitish Kumar took oath as Chief Minister for a record 10th time at Patna's Gandhi Maidan. The NDA had won a landslide of 202 of 243 seats.
Who assumed office as the 15th Vice-President of India in September 2025?
aJagdeep Dhankhar
bC. P. Radhakrishnan
cM. Venkaiah Naidu
dHarivansh Narayan Singh
Answer: B
C. P. Radhakrishnan took oath as the 15th Vice-President of India on 12 September 2025, administered by President Droupadi Murmu at Rashtrapati Bhavan, following the resignation of Jagdeep Dhankhar.
Bihar Diwas is celebrated every year on 22 March to mark the formation of Bihar as a separate province. From which province was Bihar separated in 1912?
aBengal Province
bMadras Presidency
cUnited Provinces
dCentral Provinces
Answer: A
On 22 March 1912, the Bihar and Orissa divisions were carved out of the Bengal Province to form the Province of Bihar and Orissa, with Patna as its capital.
The river known as the 'Sorrow of Bihar' because of its frequent course-shifting and devastating floods is the
aSon
bGandak
cKosi
dBagmati
Answer: C
The Kosi, a left-bank tributary of the Ganga that originates in the Himalayas and enters India through Nepal, is called the 'Sorrow of Bihar' for its destructive floods and shifting channels.
The successor of Ajatashatru who is credited with shifting the Magadhan capital to Pataliputra, near the confluence of the Ganga and the Son, was
aBimbisara
bChandragupta Maurya
cMahapadma Nanda
dUdayin
Answer: D
Ajatashatru built the original fort of Pataligrama, but his successor Udayin developed it and made Pataliputra the Magadhan capital, shifting it from Rajagriha.
Under the Constitution of India, the power to grant pardons, reprieves and remissions in respect of sentences by court-martial is vested exclusively in the
aPresident under Article 72
bGovernor under Article 161
cChief Justice of India
dCouncil of Ministers
Answer: A
Article 72 gives the President the power to grant pardons in cases of court-martial sentences, sentences under Union law, and all death sentences. The Governor's power under Article 161 does not extend to court-martial cases.
Which one of the following is a right-bank tributary of the Ganga in Bihar?
aGandak
bSon
cKosi
dBagmati
Answer: B
The Son joins the Ganga from the right (south) bank, whereas the Gandak, Kosi and Bagmati are left-bank (north) tributaries flowing down from the Himalayas.
The vitamin whose deficiency in humans causes the disease scurvy is
aVitamin A
bVitamin D
cVitamin C
dVitamin K
Answer: C
Scurvy is caused by a deficiency of Vitamin C (ascorbic acid), which is required for collagen synthesis. It leads to bleeding gums and poor wound healing.
In the Indian Parliament, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha, when there is an equality of votes on a matter, may exercise a
acasting vote
bveto vote
cdouble vote
ddeciding ordinance
Answer: A
Under Article 100 of the Constitution, the Speaker does not vote in the first instance but exercises a casting vote in the case of an equality of votes to break the tie.
The 2025 Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences (Nobel Prize in Economics) was awarded for work on economic growth driven by innovation. One half went to Joel Mokyr, while the other half was shared by Philippe Aghion and
aPaul Romer
bDaron Acemoglu
cClaudia Goldin
dPeter Howitt
Answer: D
The 2025 Economics Nobel went to Joel Mokyr (one half) and jointly to Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt (the other half) for the theory of sustained growth through creative destruction.
Following the Bihar Legislative Assembly election held in November 2025, who was sworn in as Chief Minister of Bihar?
aTejashwi Yadav
bPrashant Kishor
cSamrat Choudhary
dNitish Kumar
Answer: D
The NDA won a landslide (202 of 243 seats) in the November 2025 Bihar Assembly election, and JD(U) leader Nitish Kumar was elected the NDA legislature party leader and took oath as Chief Minister.
Lt Gen (Retd) Syed Ata Hasnain was sworn in in March 2026 as the Governor of which State?
aJharkhand
bBihar
cWest Bengal
dUttar Pradesh
Answer: B
Lt Gen (Retd) Syed Ata Hasnain was sworn in as Governor of Bihar on 14 March 2026, succeeding Arif Mohammad Khan, becoming the first former Army officer to hold the post.
Justice Surya Kant assumed office in November 2025 as the Chief Justice of India. He holds which numerical position in the line of Chief Justices of India?
a51st
b53rd
c52nd
d54th
Answer: B
Justice Surya Kant succeeded Justice B.R. Gavai (the 52nd CJI) on 24 November 2025 to become the 53rd Chief Justice of India.
The Champaran Satyagraha of 1917, the first civil disobedience movement led by Mahatma Gandhi in India, was launched against the exploitation of cultivators forced to grow which crop?
aCotton
bSugarcane
cIndigo
dOpium
Answer: C
In Champaran (Bihar), peasants were compelled under the tinkathia system to grow indigo on part of their land; Gandhi's 1917 Satyagraha secured relief for them.
Under the Constitution of India, the power of the President to grant pardons, reprieves and remissions of punishment is provided in which Article?
aArticle 61
bArticle 72
cArticle 76
dArticle 123
Answer: B
Article 72 confers on the President the power to grant pardons, reprieves, respites and remissions of punishment; the parallel power for Governors is in Article 161.
The 'Jallianwala Bagh massacre' of 13 April 1919, which led Rabindranath Tagore to renounce his knighthood, took place in which city?
aLahore
bDelhi
cAmritsar
dKanpur
Answer: C
The massacre occurred at Jallianwala Bagh in Amritsar, when troops under General Dyer fired on an unarmed gathering; Tagore returned his knighthood in protest.
The 2025 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to Maria Corina Machado for her work promoting democratic rights in
aVenezuela
bBelarus
cCuba
dNicaragua
Answer: A
Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado won the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize for promoting democratic rights and a peaceful transition in Venezuela.
The Champaran Satyagraha of 1917, the first civil disobedience movement launched by Mahatma Gandhi in India, was directed against the exploitation of cultivators under which system?
aTinkathia (indigo) system
bPermanent Settlement
cRyotwari system
dMahalwari system
Answer: A
Champaran's indigo planters forced peasants to grow indigo on three-twentieths (tinkathia) of their land; Gandhi's 1917 satyagraha secured relief for them.
A shopkeeper marks an article at Rs. 500 and allows a discount of 20%. If he still makes a profit of 25% on the cost price, the cost price of the article is
Under the Constitution of India, which Article empowers the High Court to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose?
aArticle 32
bArticle 226
cArticle 136
dArticle 142
Answer: B
Article 226 confers on every High Court the power to issue writs not only for fundamental rights but also for 'any other purpose', a wider scope than Article 32.
In the Indian polity, the maximum period for which a Proclamation of Emergency under Article 356 (President's Rule) can ordinarily continue without parliamentary approval is:
aOne month
bTwo months
cThree months
dSix months
Answer: B
A Proclamation under Article 356 must be laid before Parliament and ceases to operate after two months unless approved by both Houses within that period.
A sum of money doubles itself in 8 years at simple interest. In how many years will it become four times the original sum at the same rate?
a24 years
b16 years
c32 years
d12 years
Answer: A
If money doubles in 8 years, the interest equals the principal in 8 years; to become four times, the interest must equal three times the principal, needing 8 x 3 = 24 years.
'Bihar Diwas' (Bihar Day) is celebrated every year on 22 March to mark the day the province of Bihar was carved out of which presidency in 1912?
aMadras Presidency
bBombay Presidency
cBengal Presidency
dAgra Presidency
Answer: C
On 22 March 1912 the Bihar and Orissa divisions were separated from the Bengal Presidency, forming the Province of Bihar and Orissa; the day is observed as Bihar Diwas.
Mahatma Gandhi's first Satyagraha in India in 1917 was launched in support of the indigo cultivators of which district of Bihar?
aSaran
bChamparan
cGaya
dBhagalpur
Answer: B
The Champaran Satyagraha of 1917 was Gandhi's first major civil disobedience movement in India, taken up on behalf of indigo cultivators exploited under the tinkathia system.
Under which Article of the Constitution of India can the President proclaim a state of emergency in a State on the ground of failure of constitutional machinery (President's Rule)?
aArticle 352
bArticle 360
cArticle 356
dArticle 370
Answer: C
Article 356 empowers the President to assume to himself the functions of a State government where its constitutional machinery has broken down, commonly called President's Rule.
The Fundamental Duties of citizens were added to the Constitution of India by which Constitutional Amendment Act?
a24th Amendment, 1971
b61st Amendment, 1988
c44th Amendment, 1978
d42nd Amendment, 1976
Answer: D
The 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976, inserted Part IVA (Article 51A) listing the Fundamental Duties on the recommendation of the Swaran Singh Committee.
Which one of the following writs is issued by a court to a public official to compel the performance of a duty he has refused to perform?
aHabeas Corpus
bQuo Warranto
cCertiorari
dMandamus
Answer: D
The writ of Mandamus ('we command') is issued to a public authority directing it to perform a public or statutory duty which it has failed to discharge.
A sum of money doubles itself in 8 years at simple interest. In how many years will it become four times of itself at the same rate?
a16 years
b32 years
c24 years
d12 years
Answer: C
Doubling in 8 years means the interest earned equals the principal in 8 years; becoming four times needs interest equal to three times the principal, i.e., 3 x 8 = 24 years.
Which river, a left-bank tributary of the Ganga that enters India from Nepal, is popularly known as the 'Sorrow of Bihar'?
aGandak
bKosi
cSon
dBagmati
Answer: B
The Kosi is called the 'Sorrow of Bihar' because its frequent shifting of course and heavy silt cause devastating floods; it joins the Ganga as a left-bank tributary.
Who took oath as the Chief Minister of Bihar following the November 2025 Bihar Legislative Assembly elections?
aNitish Kumar
bTejashwi Yadav
cSamrat Choudhary
dVijay Kumar Sinha
Answer: A
After the NDA's landslide win in the November 2025 election, Nitish Kumar of the JD(U) took oath as Chief Minister of Bihar for a record 10th time on 20th November 2025.
The Champaran Satyagraha of 1917, the first civil-disobedience experiment of Mahatma Gandhi in India, was launched against the oppressive cultivation of which crop?
aCotton
bIndigo
cJute
dOpium
Answer: B
At Champaran in Bihar, Gandhi led peasants against the 'tinkathia' system that forced them to grow indigo for European planters on poor terms.
Under the Constitution of India, the 'Right to Constitutional Remedies' through which the Supreme Court may issue writs is guaranteed by which Article?
aArticle 19
bArticle 21
cArticle 32
dArticle 44
Answer: C
Article 32 confers the right to move the Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights; Dr. Ambedkar called it the 'heart and soul' of the Constitution.
A sum of money becomes double in 8 years at a certain rate of simple interest. In how many years will the same sum become four times itself at the same rate?
a24 years
b16 years
c32 years
d12 years
Answer: A
Doubling in 8 years means the interest equals the principal in 8 years, so the rate gives 100% interest in 8 years. To become four times, the interest must equal three times the principal, needing 8 x 3 = 24 years.
Bihar Diwas, marking the day on which Bihar was carved out as a separate province from the Bengal Presidency, is celebrated every year on
a1 April
b22 March
c15 August
d26 January
Answer: B
On 22 March 1912 the Bihar and Orissa divisions were separated from the Bengal Presidency to form a new province, and the day is observed annually as Bihar Diwas.
A minor admitted to the benefits of partnership may, under Section 30 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, give public notice electing to become or not to become a partner within how long of attaining majority?
aThree months
bOne year
cSix months
dTwo years
Answer: C
Under Section 30(5), within six months of attaining majority (or of obtaining knowledge of his admission, whichever is later), the minor may give public notice of his election; failing which, under the proviso, he becomes a partner.
Where an outgoing partner's share is used by the continuing partners without a final settlement of accounts, Section 37 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 entitles him, in the absence of a contract to the contrary, to such share of subsequent profits attributable to the use of his property or, at his option, to interest at the rate of
afour per cent per annum
bsix per cent per annum
cnine per cent per annum
dtwelve per cent per annum
Answer: B
Section 37 gives the outgoing partner (or his estate) the option of either a share of subsequent profits attributable to the use of his share of the property, or interest at six per cent per annum on the amount of his share in the property of the firm.
Dissolution of a partnership firm by the order of the Court, at the suit of a partner, is provided under which section of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932?
aSection 44
bSection 42
cSection 43
dSection 40
Answer: A
Section 44 enumerates the grounds (such as insanity, permanent incapacity, misconduct, persistent breach of agreement, transfer of interest, business at a loss, or just and equitable grounds) on which the Court may, at the suit of a partner, dissolve a firm.
The effect of non-registration of a firm is dealt with under which section of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932?
aSection 58
bSection 69
cSection 68
dSection 59
Answer: B
Section 69 provides that an unregistered firm (or a partner of it) cannot institute a suit to enforce a contractual right against the firm, its partners, or third parties, subject to specified exceptions.
A and B carry on business as an unregistered firm. The firm wishes to file a suit against C, a third party, to recover a contractual debt. Under Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932, such a suit is
anot maintainable, because the firm is unregistered
bmaintainable, as registration is optional
cmaintainable only if the debt exceeds rupees one hundred
dmaintainable only with the leave of the Court
Answer: A
Under Section 69(2), no suit to enforce a right arising from a contract can be instituted by or on behalf of an unregistered firm against a third party; the firm and the suing partners must be shown in the Register of Firms.
Although the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 itself came into force on 1st October, 1932, the provision relating to the effect of non-registration of firms (Section 69) was brought into force on
a1st October, 1932
b1st January, 1933
c1st October, 1933
d1st April, 1934
Answer: C
By Section 1(3) of the Act, the Act came into force on 1st October, 1932, except Section 69, which came into force on 1st October, 1933, to give firms time to get registered.
In determining whether a group of persons is or is not a firm, Section 6 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 requires regard to be had to
athe existence of a written partnership deed alone
bthe sharing of profits alone, which is conclusive
cthe real relation between the parties as shown by all relevant facts taken together
dregistration of the firm alone
Answer: C
Section 6 lays down that regard shall be had to the real relation between the parties as shown by all relevant facts; mere sharing of profits is not, by itself, conclusive proof of partnership.
Under Rule 10 of the Companies (Miscellaneous) Rules, 2014 read with Section 464 of the Companies Act, 2013, the maximum number of partners that a partnership firm carrying on business (other than banking) may have is
a10
b20
c100
d50
Answer: D
Section 464 of the Companies Act, 2013 caps the number at 100, but Rule 10 of the Companies (Miscellaneous) Rules, 2014 prescribes the maximum as 50; a firm exceeding this becomes an illegal association.
Under Section 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, an applicant seeking to set aside a decree passed ex parte by a Court of Small Causes must, at the time of presenting the application, either give the security directed by the Court or
afurnish an indemnity bond executed by two sureties
bobtain prior leave of the District Judge
cdeposit in the Court the amount due from him under the decree
ddeposit one-half of the decretal amount as costs
Answer: C
The proviso to Section 17(1) requires the applicant, at the time of presenting an application to set aside an ex parte decree or for review, to either deposit the amount due under the decree or give such security as the Court may, on a previous application, have directed. This condition has been held mandatory.
Subject to the exceptions in the Second Schedule and any enactment in force, the general pecuniary limit up to which all suits of a civil nature are cognizable by a Court of Small Causes under Section 15 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 (before any State enhancement) is
aone hundred rupees
btwo thousand rupees
cfive hundred rupees
dfive thousand rupees
Answer: C
Section 15(2) makes cognizable by a Court of Small Causes all suits of a civil nature of which the value does not exceed five hundred rupees, subject to the Second Schedule exceptions; under Section 15(3) the State Government may raise the limit to one thousand rupees.
Which of the following suits is EXCEPTED from the cognizance of a Court of Small Causes under the Second Schedule to the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887?
aA suit for the partition of immovable property
bA suit for the price of goods sold
cA suit for arrears of money lent
dA suit for compensation for breach of an ordinary contract for hire
Answer: A
A suit for the partition of immovable property is expressly listed among the suits excepted from the cognizance of a Court of Small Causes in the Second Schedule; ordinary money and contract suits within the pecuniary limit remain cognizable.
Under Section 16 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, a suit cognizable by a Court of Small Causes
amay be tried either by the Court of Small Causes or by any other competent civil court at the plaintiff's option
bmust first be tried by the District Judge and then transferred
cshall not be tried by any other court having jurisdiction within the local limits of the Court of Small Causes
dcan be tried only after the State Government grants special sanction
Answer: C
Section 16 gives the Court of Small Causes exclusive jurisdiction by providing that, save as expressly provided, a suit cognizable by such court shall not be tried by any other court having jurisdiction within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Court of Small Causes.
Where, in a suit instituted in a Court of Small Causes, it appears that the right of the plaintiff depends on the determination of a question of title to immovable property which the court cannot finally decide, Section 23 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 empowers the court at any stage of the proceedings to
areturn the plaint to be presented to a court having jurisdiction to determine the title
bdecide the question of title finally as a court of unlimited jurisdiction
cdismiss the suit for want of jurisdiction
dstay the suit indefinitely until the title is settled by a competent court
Answer: A
Section 23 is discretionary: where the plaintiff's right depends on a question of title to immovable property which the Small Cause Court cannot finally determine, the court may at any stage return the plaint for presentation to a court having jurisdiction to determine the title.
Under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, the power to call for the case and satisfy itself that a decree or order made by a Court of Small Causes was according to law vests in the
aCourt of Session
bHigh Court
cBoard of Revenue
dState Government
Answer: B
Section 25 confers revisional power on the High Court, which, to satisfy itself that a decree or order of a Court of Small Causes was according to law, may call for the case and pass such order as it thinks fit (subject to certain State amendments conferring it on the District Judge in particular cases).
As a general rule under the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, a decree or order made by a Court of Small Causes in a suit cognizable by it is
aappealable to the District Judge as a matter of right
bappealable to the High Court on questions of fact and law
csubject to a first and a second appeal like an ordinary civil decree
dfinal, save as otherwise provided by the Act
Answer: D
Section 27 provides that, save as provided by the Act, a decree or order made by a Court of Small Causes shall be final; ordinary appeals are barred, the principal corrective being revision under Section 25.
Except as otherwise provided by the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 itself, the procedure to be followed in a Court of Small Causes is that prescribed by
athe Code of Criminal Procedure
bthe Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
crules framed exclusively by the Bar Council
dthe Indian Evidence Act alone
Answer: B
Section 17(1) provides that the procedure prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 shall, save in so far as otherwise provided by that Code or by this Act, be the procedure followed in a Court of Small Causes.
Under the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, the authority empowered to establish a Court of Small Causes at a place beyond the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of a presidency-town High Court, and to define the local limits of its jurisdiction, is the
aDistrict Judge, by administrative order
bHigh Court, by notification in the Gazette
cCentral Government, by rules
dState Government, by order in writing
Answer: D
Section 5 empowers the State Government, by order in writing, to establish a Court of Small Causes at any place beyond the local limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of a presidency-town High Court and to define the local limits of its jurisdiction.
Which one of the following suits would be COGNIZABLE by a Court of Small Causes (i.e., NOT excepted by the Second Schedule to the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887), assuming it is within the pecuniary limit?
aA suit for the recovery of money lent on a promissory note
bA suit for the specific performance of a contract
cA suit for compensation for malicious prosecution
dA suit to obtain an injunction
Answer: A
Suits for malicious prosecution, specific performance and injunction are all expressly excepted by the Second Schedule. A simple money suit on a promissory note within the pecuniary limit is of a civil nature not so excepted and is therefore cognizable by a Court of Small Causes.
Under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the term "goods" means every kind of movable property and includes
aStocks, shares, growing crops and things attached to land agreed to be severed before sale
bActionable claims and money
cImmovable property attached to earth
dMoney in circulation as legal tender
Answer: A
Section 2(7) defines goods as every kind of movable property other than actionable claims and money, but expressly includes stock and shares, growing crops, grass and things attached to or forming part of the land which are agreed to be severed before sale or under the contract of sale.
Where under a contract of sale the property in the goods is transferred from the seller to the buyer at once, the contract is called a
aAgreement to sell
bSale
cHire-purchase agreement
dConditional sale
Answer: B
Under Section 4, where property in goods is transferred immediately it is a "sale"; where the transfer of property is to take place at a future time or subject to a condition, it is an "agreement to sell".
A stipulation in a contract of sale which is essential to the main purpose of the contract, the breach of which gives a right to treat the contract as repudiated, is called a
aWarranty
bGuarantee
cCondition
dCollateral term
Answer: C
Section 12(2) defines a condition as a stipulation essential to the main purpose of the contract, breach of which gives a right to treat the contract as repudiated; a warranty under Section 12(3) is only collateral and gives a right to damages.
The maxim "Caveat Emptor", as applicable to the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, means
aLet the buyer beware
bLet the seller beware
cBuyer and seller must act in good faith
dGoods must answer their description
Answer: A
Caveat emptor means "let the buyer beware"; the rule is embodied in Section 16, which provides that ordinarily there is no implied condition as to quality or fitness, subject to the stated exceptions.
Where goods are bought by description from a seller who deals in goods of that description, the implied condition under Section 16 of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 is that the goods shall be
aOf merchantable quality
bFit for the particular purpose of the buyer
cFree from all encumbrances
dEqual to the sample in quality
Answer: A
Section 16(2) provides that where goods are bought by description from a seller who deals in goods of that description, there is an implied condition that the goods shall be of merchantable quality.
In a contract of sale, unless the circumstances show a different intention, there is an implied condition on the part of the seller that
aHe will deliver the goods at the buyer's place
bThe price is reasonable
cThe goods are insured against loss
dHe has a right to sell the goods
Answer: D
Section 14(a) implies a condition that the seller has a right to sell the goods, and in the case of an agreement to sell, that he will have such a right at the time when the property is to pass.
Where there is a contract for the sale of unascertained goods, the property in the goods
aPasses immediately on making the contract
bPasses only on payment of the full price
cIs not transferred to the buyer unless and until the goods are ascertained
dPasses only on delivery of the goods
Answer: C
Section 18 provides that where there is a contract for the sale of unascertained goods, no property in the goods is transferred to the buyer unless and until the goods are ascertained.
Unless otherwise agreed, under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 the risk of loss of the goods prima facie
aAlways remains with the seller until delivery
bPasses with the property in the goods
cAlways passes on payment of price
dPasses only when delivery is actually made
Answer: B
Section 26 lays down that unless otherwise agreed, goods remain at the seller's risk until property therein is transferred; once property passes to the buyer, the goods are at the buyer's risk whether delivery has been made or not (res perit domino).
Where goods are sold by a person who is not the owner and who sells without the authority or consent of the owner, the buyer, under the general rule of Section 27, acquires
aA good title free from all defects
bTitle only after one year of peaceful possession
cAbsolute ownership by virtue of payment of price
dNo better title to the goods than the seller had
Answer: D
Section 27 embodies the maxim nemo dat quod non habet: where goods are sold by a non-owner without authority or consent of the owner, the buyer acquires no better title than the seller had, subject to the exceptions provided in the Act.
Under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, a seller of goods is deemed to be an "unpaid seller" when
aWhen the whole of the price has not been paid or tendered, or a negotiable instrument received as conditional payment has been dishonoured
bOnly when the whole of the price has not been paid or tendered
cOnly when the goods have not been delivered
dOnly when the buyer has become insolvent
Answer: A
Section 45 provides that a seller is an unpaid seller (a) when the whole of the price has not been paid or tendered, or (b) when a bill of exchange or other negotiable instrument received as conditional payment has been dishonoured.
The right of stoppage in transit, available to an unpaid seller under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, can be exercised when the buyer
aMerely refuses to take delivery
bBecomes insolvent
cDisputes the quality of the goods
dDelays payment by a single day
Answer: B
Under Sections 46 and 50, the unpaid seller's right of stopping the goods in transit arises only in the case of insolvency of the buyer, allowing the seller to resume possession while the goods are in transit until the price is paid or tendered.
An unpaid seller who has exercised his right of lien or stoppage in transit may re-sell the goods and recover damages from the original buyer, under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, by virtue of
aSection 47
bSection 54
cSection 50
dSection 27
Answer: B
Section 54 confers on the unpaid seller the right of re-sale, where the goods are of a perishable nature or where notice of intention to re-sell has been given and the buyer fails to pay within a reasonable time.
Where goods are sold by sample as well as by description, the implied condition under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 is that
aThe bulk of the goods shall correspond both with the sample and with the description
bThe goods need correspond only with the description
cThe goods need correspond only with the sample
dThere is no implied condition in such a sale
Answer: A
Under Section 15, where goods are sold by sample as well as by description, it is not sufficient that the bulk corresponds with the sample if the goods do not also correspond with the description.
In a sale by auction under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, the sale is complete
aWhen the auctioneer announces the reserve price
bWhen the highest bid is made
cOnly when the goods are delivered to the buyer
dWhen the auctioneer announces its completion by the fall of the hammer or in other customary manner
Answer: D
Section 64(2) provides that in a sale by auction the sale is complete when the auctioneer announces its completion by the fall of the hammer or in other customary manner; until then any bidder may retract his bid.
Under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, a contract whereby the seller transfers the property in the goods to the buyer at once is called a 'sale', whereas if the transfer of property is to take place at a future time or subject to some condition, it is called
aAn executed sale
bA conditional gift
cAn agreement to sell
dA hire-purchase
Answer: C
Section 4 distinguishes a sale (property passes at once) from an agreement to sell, where transfer of property is to take place at a future time or subject to a condition later to be fulfilled.
Where there is a contract for the sale of specific goods and the goods, without the knowledge of the seller, had already perished at the time the contract was made, the contract under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 is
aVoidable at the option of the buyer
bValid but unenforceable
cVoid
dMerely an agreement to sell
Answer: C
Section 7 provides that where, at the time the contract was made, specific goods had perished or become so damaged as no longer to answer their description, the contract is void.
Where there is an agreement to sell specific goods and the goods subsequently perish without any fault of the seller or buyer before the risk passes to the buyer, the agreement
aBecomes voidable at the seller's option
bRemains binding on both parties
cIs converted into a completed sale
dIs thereby avoided
Answer: D
Section 8 provides that an agreement to sell specific goods is avoided where the goods, without fault of either party, perish or become so damaged before risk passes to the buyer.
A stipulation in a contract of sale which is essential to the main purpose of the contract, the breach of which gives a right to treat the contract as repudiated, is under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 known as a
aWarranty
bRepresentation
cCovenant
dCondition
Answer: D
Section 12 defines a condition as a stipulation essential to the main purpose of the contract whose breach gives rise to a right to repudiate, while a warranty is collateral and its breach gives only a claim for damages.
The rule of caveat emptor under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 is qualified by an implied condition as to fitness for the buyer's particular purpose. This implied condition is contained in
aSection 14
bSection 15
cSection 16
dSection 17
Answer: C
Section 16 lays down the implied conditions as to quality or fitness, including fitness for the buyer's particular purpose where reliance is placed on the seller's skill or judgment, forming the principal exception to caveat emptor.
In a contract for sale by sample under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, which of the following is NOT an implied condition?
aThe bulk shall correspond with the sample in quality
bThe seller shall deliver the goods at the buyer's place of business
cThe goods shall be free from any latent defect rendering them unmerchantable
dThe buyer shall have a reasonable opportunity of comparing the bulk with the sample
Answer: B
Section 17 implies, in a sale by sample, conditions as to correspondence of bulk with sample, opportunity to compare, and freedom from unmerchantable defects not apparent on reasonable examination; place of delivery is not one of them.
Under an unconditional contract for the sale of specific goods in a deliverable state, the property in the goods passes to the buyer under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930
aWhen the goods are delivered
bWhen the contract is made
cWhen the price is paid
dWhen the buyer takes physical possession
Answer: B
Section 20 provides that where there is an unconditional contract for sale of specific goods in a deliverable state, property passes when the contract is made, irrespective of postponement of payment or delivery.
Unless otherwise agreed, under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 the goods remain at the risk of the seller until
aThe property therein is transferred to the buyer
bThe goods are delivered to the buyer
cThe buyer has paid the full price
dThe goods are insured by the buyer
Answer: A
Section 26 lays down that, prima facie, risk passes with property; the goods remain at the seller's risk until the property in them is transferred to the buyer, whether or not delivery has been made.
The maxim 'nemo dat quod non habet', which embodies the general rule that a seller cannot give a better title than he himself has, is given statutory effect under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930 in
aSection 19
bSection 23
cSection 30
dSection 27
Answer: D
Section 27 enacts the nemo dat rule: where goods are sold by a person who is not the owner and who sells without the owner's authority or consent, the buyer acquires no better title than the seller had.
An unpaid seller of goods who is in possession of them is entitled, under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930, to retain possession until payment of the price. This right is known as the unpaid seller's
aRight of stoppage in transit
bRight of set-off
cRight of re-sale
dRight of lien
Answer: D
Section 47 confers on an unpaid seller in possession of the goods a lien, i.e., the right to retain possession until payment or tender of the price, notwithstanding that property may have passed to the buyer.
Where an unpaid seller who has exercised his right of lien or stoppage in transit re-sells the goods, the subsequent buyer under the Sale of Goods Act, 1930
aAcquires no title because the original sale subsists
bAcquires a good title to the goods as against the original buyer
cAcquires title only with the original buyer's consent
dAcquires a title that is voidable at the original buyer's option
Answer: B
Section 54 provides that where an unpaid seller who has exercised lien or stoppage in transit re-sells the goods, the new buyer acquires a good title as against the original buyer, even where no express right of re-sale was reserved.
A suit by a person dispossessed of immovable property without his consent, otherwise than in due course of law, under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 must be brought within
athirty days from the date of dispossession
bthree years from the date of dispossession
cone year from the date of dispossession
dsix months from the date of dispossession
Answer: D
Section 6(2)(a) bars a suit under that section after the expiry of six months from the date of dispossession. The limitation is special and not three years as under the Limitation Act.
Against an order or decree passed in a suit instituted under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
aan appeal lies but no review
bneither an appeal nor a review shall lie
cboth an appeal and a review lie
donly a revision lies to the High Court
Answer: B
Section 6(3) expressly bars both appeal and review from any order or decree passed in a suit under Section 6, the remedy being a regular title suit instead.
After the Specific Relief (Amendment) Act, 2018, specific performance of a contract under Section 10
amay be enforced in the discretion of the court
bcan never be enforced where damages are claimable
cshall be enforced by the court, subject to the provisions of Sections 11(2), 14 and 16
dshall be enforced only with the prior sanction of the State Government
Answer: C
The 2018 amendment substituted the discretionary 'may' with 'shall be enforced subject to the provisions contained in sub-section (2) of section 11, section 14 and section 16', making specific performance the rule rather than the exception.
Which of the following is NOT among the contracts that cannot be specifically enforced under Section 14 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (as amended in 2018)?
aA contract which is in its nature determinable
bA contract the performance of which involves a continuous duty which the court cannot supervise
cA contract for the transfer of immovable property where monetary compensation is also available
dA contract so dependent on the personal qualifications of the parties that the court cannot enforce specific performance of its material terms
Answer: C
Amended Section 14 lists only four excluded categories; a contract for immovable property is generally specifically enforceable, and mere availability of money compensation no longer bars it after the 2018 amendment.
The remedy of 'substituted performance' of a contract, whereby an aggrieved party may get the contract performed through a third party or his own agency and recover costs from the defaulting party, was introduced by the 2018 amendment in
aSection 15 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
bSection 18 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
cSection 25 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
dSection 20 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
Answer: D
The Specific Relief (Amendment) Act, 2018 substituted Section 20 to provide for substituted performance, requiring a thirty-day notice in writing to the defaulting party before exercising the option.
Section 20A of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, inserted by the 2018 amendment, provides that no injunction shall be granted by a court in a suit involving a contract relating to
aany commercial dispute exceeding rupees one crore
bany contract with a foreign company
can infrastructure project specified in the Schedule, where the injunction would cause impediment or delay in its progress or completion
dagricultural land situated within municipal limits
Answer: C
Section 20A bars grant of injunction in suits involving contracts relating to infrastructure projects specified in the Schedule where it would impede or delay the project's progress or completion.
Under Section 16 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, specific performance of a contract cannot be enforced in favour of a person who
afails to aver and prove that he has performed or has always been ready and willing to perform the essential terms of the contract
bfails to prove that money compensation would be inadequate
cis a minor at the date of the suit
dhas not obtained the prior permission of the court
Answer: A
Section 16(c) (after the 2018 amendment) requires the plaintiff to aver and prove that he has performed or has always been ready and willing to perform the essential terms of the contract on his part.
A person seeking specific performance of a contract who fails to seek the relief in the same suit but later sues for compensation for its breach is barred. This rule, that a plaintiff cannot afterwards sue for compensation if he omitted to claim it in the suit for specific performance, is contained in
aSection 24 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
bSection 21 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
cSection 27 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
dSection 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
Answer: A
Section 24 bars a fresh suit for compensation for breach where the plaintiff's suit for specific performance is dismissed and he had not claimed such compensation in that suit.
Any person against whom a written instrument is void or voidable, and who has reasonable apprehension that the instrument if left outstanding may cause him serious injury, may sue to have it adjudged void or cancelled. This relief of cancellation of instruments is provided in
aSection 26 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
bSection 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
cSection 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
dSection 39 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
Answer: B
Section 31 deals with when cancellation of a written instrument that is void or voidable may be ordered, where it may cause serious injury if left outstanding.
A suit for a mere declaration of legal character or right to property, without seeking further consequential relief which the plaintiff is able to seek, shall be dismissed. This proviso to the declaratory relief is found in
aSection 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
bSection 35 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
cSection 38 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
dSection 41 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963
Answer: A
The proviso to Section 34 bars a court from making a declaration where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere declaration of title, omits to do so.
A declaration of status or right made under Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 is binding
aonly on the parties to the suit and persons claiming through them respectively
bon the whole world as a judgment in rem
conly on the plaintiff
don the State Government in every case
Answer: A
Section 35 provides that a declaration under Section 34 binds only the parties to the suit and persons claiming through them respectively; it is not a judgment in rem.
Under Section 41(a) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, an injunction cannot be granted to restrain a person from prosecuting a judicial proceeding pending at the institution of the suit, EXCEPT where
athe proceeding is before a criminal court
bthe defendant is a public servant
csuch restraint is necessary to prevent a multiplicity of proceedings
dthe value of the suit exceeds rupees one lakh
Answer: C
Section 41(a) prohibits an injunction to stay a pending judicial proceeding unless such restraint is necessary to prevent a multiplicity of proceedings.
A perpetual injunction may be granted under Section 38 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 to prevent the breach of an obligation existing in favour of the plaintiff. Where the obligation arises from contract, the court is to be guided by the rules and provisions contained in
aChapter I of the Act
bChapter II of the Act (relating to specific performance of contracts)
cChapter VI of the Act (relating to declaratory decrees)
dthe Code of Civil Procedure alone
Answer: B
Section 38(2) provides that when the obligation arises from contract, the court shall be guided by the rules and provisions contained in Chapter II of the Act dealing with specific performance.
Recovery of possession of specific movable property, otherwise than in the manner provided by the Specific Relief Act, 1963, may be claimed by a person entitled to possession under
aSection 5 of the Act
bSection 8 of the Act
cSection 7 of the Act
dSection 12 of the Act
Answer: C
Section 7 provides that a person entitled to the possession of specific movable property may recover it in the manner provided by the Code of Civil Procedure; Section 8 deals with delivery by a person in possession but not the owner.
A person dispossessed without his consent of immovable property, otherwise than in due course of law, may sue to recover possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. Such a suit must be brought within
asix months from the date of dispossession
bthree months from the date of dispossession
cone year from the date of dispossession
dthree years from the date of dispossession
Answer: A
Section 6(2)(a) bars any suit under Section 6 after the expiry of six months from the date of dispossession. No appeal or review lies from a decree under this section, and no such suit lies against the Government.
After the Specific Relief (Amendment) Act, 2018, the nature of the relief of specific performance of a contract under Section 10 has been altered. Specific performance of a contract is now
aavailable only where money compensation is not an adequate relief
bpurely within the discretion of the court as before
cto be enforced by the court, subject only to the provisions of Sections 11(2), 14 and 16
dabolished as a remedy in commercial contracts
Answer: C
The 2018 amendment substituted Section 10 so that specific performance 'shall be enforced' subject to Sections 11(2), 14 and 16; it is no longer a discretionary remedy. Grant of the relief is now the rule and refusal the exception.
Under Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 (as substituted by the 2018 Amendment), a party suffering breach of contract may get the contract performed by a third party or his own agency (substituted performance) and recover the cost from the defaulting party. However, no such substituted performance is permissible unless the party has, before procuring it, given the defaulting party a written notice of not less than
afifteen days
bthirty days
csixty days
dninety days
Answer: B
The substituted Section 20 allows substituted performance only after the aggrieved party serves a written notice of not less than thirty days on the party in breach, calling upon it to perform within such time.
Under the proviso to Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, a court shall not make a declaration as to a person's legal character or right where the plaintiff
ais able to seek further relief than a mere declaration of title but omits to do so
bhas already obtained a declaration in an earlier suit
cis in possession of the property in question
dseeks the declaration against the Government
Answer: A
The proviso to Section 34 bars a bare declaratory decree where the plaintiff, being able to seek further (consequential) relief, omits to claim it; he cannot ask only for a declaration in such a case.
Which one of the following contracts is, as a general rule, NOT specifically enforceable under Section 14 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963?
aA contract for the sale of a particular plot of immovable property
bA contract for the transfer of shares in a closely held company having a special value
cA contract to execute a registered mortgage deed
dA contract which is so dependent on the personal qualifications of a party that the court cannot enforce specific performance of its material terms
Answer: D
Section 14 lists contracts not specifically enforceable, including a contract so dependent on the personal qualifications of a party that the court cannot enforce specific performance of its material terms; sale of land is the classic case where damages are inadequate and specific performance is granted.
aDamage without violation of a legal right, which is not actionable
bViolation of a legal right without actual damage, which is actionable
cWhere there is a right there is a remedy
dA wrong done by a stranger for which no one is liable
Answer: B
Injuria sine damno means infringement of a legal right without any actual loss; it is actionable per se, as held in Ashby v. White (1703) where a voter wrongfully prevented from voting succeeded though he suffered no loss.
The 'neighbour principle', which forms the modern foundation of the tort of negligence, was propounded by Lord Atkin in:
aRylands v. Fletcher
bHadley v. Baxendale
cAshby v. White
dDonoghue v. Stevenson
Answer: D
In Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] AC 562, Lord Atkin laid down that one must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions likely to injure one's 'neighbour', i.e. persons so closely and directly affected that one ought reasonably to have them in contemplation.
The rule of strict liability laid down in Rylands v. Fletcher applies only where the defendant makes a:
aNatural use of his land
bLawful use of his land authorised by statute
cNon-natural use of his land and the dangerous thing escapes
dUse of land with the consent of the plaintiff
Answer: C
Under Rylands v. Fletcher (1868), liability arises only when a person brings onto his land, in the course of a non-natural use, something likely to do mischief which then escapes; a natural use of land does not attract the rule.
Which of the following is NOT recognised as an exception (defence) to the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher?
aAct of God
bPlaintiff's own default
cConsent of the plaintiff
dPoor financial condition of the defendant
Answer: D
The recognised exceptions to strict liability under Rylands v. Fletcher are act of God, plaintiff's own fault, consent of the plaintiff, act of a third party/stranger and statutory authority; the defendant's financial condition is irrelevant.
The principle of 'absolute liability', which admits of no exceptions, was first laid down by the Supreme Court of India in:
aBhim Singh v. State of J&K
bKasturilal v. State of U.P.
cRylands v. Fletcher
dM.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak case)
Answer: D
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086 (Oleum Gas Leak case), the Supreme Court evolved the rule of absolute liability for enterprises engaged in hazardous activities, holding such liability is not subject to the exceptions available under Rylands v. Fletcher.
bInfringement of a legal right without any loss, which is actionable
cActual loss caused without infringement of any legal right, which is not actionable
dA wrong actionable only on proof of malice
Answer: C
Damnum sine injuria means actual damage suffered without violation of any legal right and is not actionable, as illustrated by the Gloucester Grammar School case where a rival schoolmaster caused loss by lawful competition.
In Bhim Singh v. State of Jammu & Kashmir, the Supreme Court awarded exemplary damages of Rs. 50,000 to the plaintiff for the tort of:
aDefamation
bWrongful/false imprisonment by illegal detention
cMalicious prosecution
dNegligence
Answer: B
In Bhim Singh v. State of J&K, AIR 1986 SC 494, an MLA was illegally detained by the police to prevent his attending an Assembly session; the Court awarded Rs. 50,000 as exemplary damages for the wrongful detention violating Articles 21 and 22.
In Kasturilal v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the State was held NOT liable for the negligence of its police officers in losing the plaintiff's gold because the act was committed in the exercise of:
aA non-sovereign (commercial) function
bA contractual obligation
cA statutory duty owed to the plaintiff
dA sovereign function
Answer: D
In Kasturilal v. State of U.P., AIR 1965 SC 1039, the Supreme Court held that the negligent act of the police in handling seized property was done in discharge of a sovereign function, so the State enjoyed sovereign immunity and was not vicariously liable.
Defamation in a permanent or written form, such as in print, is technically known as:
aLibel
bSlander
cMalice
dInnuendo
Answer: A
Libel is defamation in a permanent and visible form (e.g. writing, print, picture) and is actionable per se, whereas slander is defamation in a transient form such as spoken words.
The defence of 'Volenti non fit injuria' means that:
aNo remedy lies for a wrong consented to by the plaintiff
bAn act of State is not actionable
cInevitable accident is a good defence
dStatutory authority bars an action
Answer: A
Volenti non fit injuria is a complete defence by which a plaintiff who has freely consented to the risk of harm cannot afterwards sue for it; consent may be express or implied.
To succeed in an action for the tort of negligence, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant owed him a duty of care, that there was a breach of that duty, AND that:
aThe defendant acted with malice
bThe defendant gained a benefit from the act
cThe breach caused damage to the plaintiff that is not too remote
dThe plaintiff suffered no actual loss
Answer: C
Negligence requires (i) a legal duty of care, (ii) breach of that duty, and (iii) consequential damage caused by the breach which is not too remote; absence of resultant damage defeats the claim.
Ubi jus ibi remedium means wherever the law confers a right it also provides a remedy for its violation; it was applied in Ashby v. White to grant relief for the denial of the right to vote.
The doctrine of 'Respondeat superior' in the law of torts relates to:
aThe vicarious liability of a master for the torts of his servant committed in the course of employment
bThe strict liability of an occupier of land
cThe personal liability of a joint tortfeasor only
dThe liability of the State for sovereign acts
Answer: A
Respondeat superior ('let the master answer') is the basis of vicarious liability, making a master liable for torts committed by his servant in the course of employment.
Which of the following is essential to constitute the tort of private nuisance?
aDirect physical entry upon the plaintiff's land
bConfinement of the plaintiff within fixed boundaries
cA false statement lowering the plaintiff's reputation
dUnlawful and substantial interference with the plaintiff's use or enjoyment of his land
Answer: D
Private nuisance is an unlawful, substantial and unreasonable interference with a person's use or enjoyment of his land or some right connected with it; unlike trespass it need not involve direct physical entry.
Which of the following is a valid general defence available in an action for tort?
aAbsence of any precedent on the point
bPoverty of the defendant
cIgnorance of law by the defendant
dInevitable accident
Answer: D
Inevitable accident, an accident not avoidable by any reasonable care, is a recognised general defence in tort along with volenti non fit injuria, act of God, statutory authority and private defence.
The maxim 'injuria sine damno' means the violation of a legal right without actual loss or damage, and such violation is by itself actionable. Which of the following decisions is the leading authority for this maxim?
aGloucester Grammar School Case
bAshby v. White
cMogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor
dBradford Corporation v. Pickles
Answer: B
In Ashby v. White (1703), a returning officer wrongfully refused to register a qualified voter's vote; though the candidate still won, the House of Lords held that infringement of the legal right to vote was actionable per se, illustrating injuria sine damno.
Where a person suffers actual loss but no legal right of his is infringed, the loss is not actionable. This principle of 'damnum sine injuria' is classically illustrated by
aAshby v. White
bDonoghue v. Stevenson
cGloucester Grammar School Case
dRylands v. Fletcher
Answer: C
In the Gloucester Grammar School Case (1410), a rival schoolmaster set up a competing school causing the plaintiff financial loss, but the court held that loss from lawful competition violates no legal right and is not actionable (damnum sine injuria).
The rule of strict liability laid down in Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) applies only where there is
aa natural use of land and no escape of the dangerous thing
ban intentional and malicious act of the defendant
ca non-natural use of land and an escape of the dangerous thing brought and accumulated on it
dproof of negligence on the part of the defendant
Answer: C
The rule requires the defendant to have made a non-natural use of his land by accumulating something likely to do mischief if it escapes, and that the thing actually escapes and causes damage; liability arises without proof of negligence.
Which of the following is NOT a recognised exception (defence) to the rule of strict liability in Rylands v. Fletcher?
aAct of God
bAct of a third party (stranger)
cPlaintiff's own default
dThe thing escaping was inherently dangerous
Answer: D
Recognised exceptions to the rule include act of God, act of a stranger, plaintiff's own fault, consent of the plaintiff, and statutory authority; that the thing was inherently dangerous is an element attracting the rule, not a defence to it.
The principle of 'absolute liability', under which an enterprise carrying on a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity is liable for harm caused irrespective of any defence and without the exceptions available under Rylands v. Fletcher, was propounded by the Supreme Court in
aBhim Singh v. State of J&K
bRylands v. Fletcher
cM.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak case)
dDonoghue v. Stevenson
Answer: C
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (AIR 1987 SC 1086), arising from the oleum gas leak at Shriram Foods, the Supreme Court evolved the rule of absolute liability, holding that the Rylands v. Fletcher exceptions do not apply to hazardous enterprises.
The modern law of negligence and the 'neighbour principle'—the duty to take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions reasonably foreseeable as likely to injure one's neighbour—was enunciated by Lord Atkin in
aHeaven v. Pender
bDonoghue v. Stevenson
cBourhill v. Young
dGrant v. Australian Knitting Mills
Answer: B
In Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932), where a decomposed snail was found in a ginger-beer bottle, Lord Atkin laid down the neighbour principle, establishing that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer.
False imprisonment requires a total restraint of the liberty of a person; a mere partial obstruction of one's movement, leaving him free to go in another direction, does not amount to false imprisonment. This was held in
aBird v. Jones
bMeering v. Grahame-White Aviation Co.
cHerring v. Boyle
dGarikapati v. Subbiah
Answer: A
In Bird v. Jones (1845) the plaintiff was prevented from crossing part of a bridge but was free to go back the way he came; the court held that imprisonment requires a total restraint of liberty, not a partial obstruction.
The definition—"Tortious liability arises from the breach of a duty primarily fixed by law; this duty is towards persons generally and its breach is redressible by an action for unliquidated damages"—was given by
aSalmond
bUnderhill
cFraser
dWinfield
Answer: D
This is Winfield's definition of tortious liability, emphasising that the duty is fixed by law and owed towards persons generally, breach being redressed by unliquidated damages.
ba person who voluntarily consents to suffer harm cannot complain of it as a legal wrong
cno person can be made liable for the act of another
dan act lawful in itself does not become unlawful merely because of a bad motive
Answer: B
Volenti non fit injuria means that one who has voluntarily and with knowledge of the risk consented to the harm cannot afterwards complain of it; the consent operates as a complete defence to the tort.
Under the principle of vicarious liability, a master is liable for the torts committed by his servant only where the wrongful act is
acommitted during off-duty hours
bcommitted in the course of employment
cexpressly authorised by the master in writing
da criminal offence under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Answer: B
A master is vicariously liable for the torts of his servant only when the act is done in the course of employment, whether it be a wrongful mode of doing an authorised act or an act incidental to the employment.
Which of the following is an essential ingredient required to be proved by the plaintiff in an action for the tort of negligence?
aMalice on the part of the defendant
bA duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, its breach, and resulting damage
cTotal restraint of the plaintiff's liberty
dPublication of a defamatory statement to a third person
Answer: B
Negligence requires a legal duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, breach of that duty by failure to exercise reasonable care, and damage to the plaintiff caused by that breach; malice is not an ingredient.
The tort of defamation in the form of libel refers to a defamatory statement made in
aa transient or spoken form
bgestures alone
ca permanent or written form
da privileged communication
Answer: C
Libel is defamation in a permanent or written (or otherwise recorded) form, whereas slander is defamation in a transient form such as spoken words or gestures.
Private nuisance, as a tort, is best described as an unlawful interference with a person's
aliberty of movement
breputation in the estimation of right-thinking members of society
cfreedom to contract
duse or enjoyment of land, or of some right over or in connection with it
Answer: D
Private nuisance is an unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land, or of some right over or in connection with it, such as interference by noise, smell, smoke or vibrations.
The Consumer Protection Act which, replacing the 1986 Act, introduced for the first time in India a statutory framework of 'product liability' and established the Central Consumer Protection Authority is the Act of
a1986
b1993
c2002
d2019
Answer: D
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (which came into force in July 2020) repealed and replaced the 1986 Act and introduced the concept of product liability and the Central Consumer Protection Authority.
The maxim 'injuria sine damno', under which the violation of a legal right is actionable even though the plaintiff suffers no actual loss, was applied by Lord Holt in which leading case?
aMayor of Bradford v. Pickles
bGloucester Grammar School Case
cAshby v. White
dMogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor
Answer: C
In Ashby v. White (1703) 92 ER 126, a returning officer wrongfully refused to record the plaintiff's vote; though the candidate still won, Lord Holt held that the violation of the legal right to vote was itself actionable (injuria sine damno).
A schoolmaster set up a rival school next to the plaintiff's school, causing the plaintiff to lose pupils and reduce his fees. The plaintiff's suit failed. This case is the classic illustration of which maxim?
aDamnum sine injuria
bInjuria sine damno
cVolenti non fit injuria
dUbi jus ibi remedium
Answer: A
The Gloucester Grammar School Case (1410) illustrates 'damnum sine injuria' — actual loss caused by lawful competition without the infringement of any legal right is not actionable.
The rule of strict liability laid down in Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) applies only where the defendant makes
aany use whatsoever of his land
ba non-natural use of his land
ca natural use of his land
dan agricultural use of his land
Answer: B
In Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) LR 3 HL 330, liability for the escape of a dangerous thing arises only where the defendant brings it onto land in the course of a 'non-natural' (special or unusual) use of that land.
The principle of 'absolute liability', which is wider than the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher and admits of no exceptions, was evolved by the Supreme Court of India in
aM.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak Case)
bRylands v. Fletcher
cDonoghue v. Stevenson
dVaughan v. Menlove
Answer: A
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086, Bhagwati C.J. evolved the rule of absolute liability for enterprises engaged in hazardous activities, holding that such liability is not subject to the exceptions recognised in Rylands v. Fletcher.
The 'neighbour principle', establishing a general duty of care in the tort of negligence, was propounded by Lord Atkin in
aDonoghue v. Stevenson
bHeaven v. Pender
cBourhill v. Young
dHedley Byrne v. Heller
Answer: A
In Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] AC 562 (the snail-in-the-ginger-beer case), Lord Atkin enunciated the neighbour principle, holding that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer.
Which of the following is NOT a recognised exception to the rule of strict liability in Rylands v. Fletcher?
aAct of God
bAct of a stranger
cNegligence of an independent contractor
dPlaintiff's own default
Answer: C
The recognised defences to the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher are plaintiff's own fault, act of God, act of a third party/stranger, consent of the plaintiff, and statutory authority; the negligence of an independent contractor is not such an exception.
Bhim Singh, an M.L.A., was wrongfully detained by the police to prevent him from attending the Legislative Assembly session. The Supreme Court awarded him Rs. 50,000 by way of
aexemplary (punitive) damages
bcontemptuous damages
cnominal damages
dliquidated damages
Answer: A
In Bhim Singh v. State of J&K, AIR 1986 SC 494, for the malicious false imprisonment of the petitioner-MLA, the Court awarded Rs. 50,000 as exemplary (punitive) damages.
Under the maxim 'qui facit per alium facit per se', a master is held liable for the torts of his servant committed
aat any time, whether or not connected with employment
bonly when the master expressly authorises the tort
cin the course of employment
donly when the servant acts for the master's benefit
Answer: C
Vicarious liability of a master for the torts of his servant arises only where the wrongful act is committed 'in the course of employment'; an act done outside the scope of employment (on a frolic of the servant's own) does not fasten liability on the master.
The defence of 'volenti non fit injuria' is not available where
athe plaintiff freely consents to the risk
bthe consent is obtained by fraud or the act is unlawful
cthe consent is given under a contract of employment voluntarily
dthe plaintiff is a spectator at a sporting event
Answer: B
Volenti non fit injuria requires free and genuine consent; the defence fails where consent is obtained by fraud or compulsion, or where the act consented to is itself illegal, since one cannot validly consent to an unlawful act.
In Wilkinson v. Downton (1897), the defendant by way of a practical joke falsely told the plaintiff that her husband had been seriously injured, causing her nervous shock. The defendant was held liable for
ano tort, as it was a mere joke
bdefamation
cnegligent misstatement
dintentional infliction of physical harm through a false statement
Answer: D
Wilkinson v. Downton [1897] 2 QB 57 recognised the tort of wilfully doing an act calculated to cause physical harm; the false statement that produced nervous shock and illness in the plaintiff made the defendant liable.
Which of the following is an essential ingredient that a plaintiff must prove in an action for malicious prosecution?
aThat the prosecution ended in the plaintiff's conviction
bThat the prosecution was a civil proceeding
cThat the defendant suffered damage
dThat the prosecution was instituted without reasonable and probable cause and with malice
Answer: D
In malicious prosecution the plaintiff must prove that the defendant prosecuted him, without reasonable and probable cause and with malice, that the proceedings terminated in the plaintiff's favour, and that he suffered damage.
A continuous, unlawful and unreasonable interference with a person's use or enjoyment of his land, or of some right in connection with it, is the tort of
aprivate nuisance
btrespass to land
cnegligence
ddefamation
Answer: A
Private nuisance is an unlawful interference with a person's use or enjoyment of land, or of some right over or in connection with it; unlike trespass it requires actual damage and is generally a continuing wrong.
Total restraint of the liberty of a person, for however short a time, without lawful justification, constitutes the tort of
aassault
bfalse imprisonment
cbattery
dmalicious prosecution
Answer: B
False imprisonment is the total restraint of a person's liberty, even momentarily and without actual touching, without lawful justification; if the restraint is only partial, leaving a reasonable means of escape, it is not false imprisonment.
Defamation in a permanent form, such as writing or print, which is actionable per se without proof of special damage, is known as
alibel
bslander
cinnuendo
dmalice
Answer: A
Libel is defamation in a permanent or visible form (writing, print, picture) and is actionable per se; slander, being defamation in a transient form such as spoken words, generally requires proof of special damage.
The Consumer Protection Act which presently governs consumer disputes in India and which repealed the earlier Act of 1986, came into force in
athe year 2015
bthe year 2017
cthe year 2021
dthe year 2019, the main provisions taking effect from July 2020
Answer: D
The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 repealed the Consumer Protection Act, 1986; its principal provisions were brought into force with effect from 20 July 2020.
The definition "Tort is a civil wrong for which the remedy is a common law action for unliquidated damages, and which is not exclusively the breach of a contract or the breach of a trust or other merely equitable obligation" is attributed to which jurist?
aWinfield
bUnderhill
cFraser
dSalmond
Answer: D
This is Salmond's definition of tort, which describes a tort by reference to the remedy (a common-law action for unliquidated damages) and excludes breach of contract, breach of trust and other purely equitable obligations.
In Ashby v. White (1703), a qualified voter was wrongfully prevented from voting by the returning officer, though the candidate he wished to vote for won the election. The court allowed his claim. This case illustrates the maxim
adamnum sine injuria
binjuria sine damno
cvolenti non fit injuria
dubi jus ibi remedium only and not any injuria maxim
Answer: B
Ashby v. White is the classic authority for injuria sine damno (infringement of a legal right without actual loss); Lord Holt held the violation of the legal right to vote was itself actionable even though no pecuniary loss resulted.
A schoolmaster set up a rival grammar school next to the plaintiff's school, drawing away pupils and forcing the plaintiff to reduce his fees. The plaintiff's suit for the resulting loss failed. The Gloucester Grammar School case (1410) is therefore an authority for
ainjuria sine damno
bdamnum sine injuria
cabsolute liability
dthe rule in Rylands v. Fletcher
Answer: B
The Gloucester Grammar School case illustrates damnum sine injuria, monetary loss caused by lawful competition without infringement of any legal right, and such loss is not actionable.
Under the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher (1868), the strict liability of a person who brings and accumulates a dangerous thing on his land arises only where there is a
anatural user of land and the thing remains on the land
bbreach of a statutory duty of care
cintentional act done with malice
dnon-natural user of land and an escape of the dangerous thing causing damage
Answer: D
Rylands v. Fletcher imposes strict liability where a person makes a non-natural use of his land by accumulating a dangerous thing which escapes and causes damage; absence of escape or non-natural use defeats the rule.
Which of the following is NOT a recognised exception or defence to the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher?
aAct of God
bThe dangerous thing was brought for the defendant's own benefit
cConsent or default of the plaintiff
dAct of a third party (stranger)
Answer: B
Act of God, act of a stranger, plaintiff's own default/consent (and statutory authority) are recognised exceptions to Rylands v. Fletcher. That the thing was brought for the defendant's own purpose is in fact a condition of liability, not a defence.
In Read v. J. Lyons & Co. Ltd. (1947), an inspector was injured by an explosion inside a munitions factory. The House of Lords held the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher inapplicable because
athe explosive was a natural use of land
bthere was no escape of the dangerous thing from the defendant's premises
cthe plaintiff had consented to the risk
dthe injury was caused by an act of God
Answer: B
Read v. Lyons held that 'escape' from the place under the defendant's control to a place outside it is essential to Rylands v. Fletcher; as the injury occurred within the factory premises there was no escape and the rule did not apply.
The principle of 'absolute liability', under which an enterprise engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity is liable without the exceptions available under Rylands v. Fletcher, was evolved by the Supreme Court of India in
aRylands v. Fletcher
bBhim Singh v. State of J&K
cDonoghue v. Stevenson
dM.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak case)
Answer: D
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987), arising from the oleum gas leak at Shriram, the Supreme Court (per Bhagwati C.J.) laid down the rule of absolute liability, holding that an enterprise carrying on a hazardous activity is absolutely liable, without the exceptions recognised in Rylands v. Fletcher.
The 'neighbour principle', as a general test for the existence of a duty of care in negligence, was enunciated by Lord Atkin in
aRylands v. Fletcher (1868)
bDonoghue v. Stevenson (1932)
cWagon Mound (No. 1) (1961)
dAshby v. White (1703)
Answer: B
In Donoghue v. Stevenson, where a decomposed snail was found in a ginger-beer bottle, Lord Atkin laid down the neighbour principle: one must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions likely to injure persons so closely and directly affected that one ought reasonably to have them in contemplation.
In an action for negligence, which of the following is NOT an essential ingredient the plaintiff must establish?
aA legal duty of care owed by the defendant to the plaintiff
bBreach of that duty by the defendant
cDamage to the plaintiff caused by the breach
dMalice or improper motive on the part of the defendant
Answer: D
Negligence requires duty of care, breach of duty and resulting damage. Malice or improper motive is not an ingredient of negligence, as the standard is objective (the conduct of the reasonable man).
The defence of 'volenti non fit injuria' requires that the plaintiff
ahad mere knowledge of the risk
bsuffered loss without any legal injury
cfreely and voluntarily agreed to undertake the risk with full knowledge of it
dwas guilty of contributory negligence
Answer: C
Volenti non fit injuria requires that the plaintiff, with full knowledge of the risk, freely and voluntarily consented to undertake it; mere knowledge (sciens) is not enough, as held in Smith v. Baker & Sons.
For the defence of 'Act of God' (vis major) to succeed, the event causing the damage must be
acaused by some human agency, even if unintended
ba wrongful act of a third-party stranger
can ordinary natural event such as normal rainfall
dthe result of natural forces so extraordinary that it could not reasonably have been foreseen or guarded against
Answer: D
Act of God is an operation of natural forces so unexpected and extraordinary that no human foresight or prudence could reasonably anticipate or guard against it; it must be free from any human agency.
The test of 'reasonable foreseeability of the kind of damage' as the criterion for remoteness of damage in negligence, replacing the directness test of Re Polemis, was laid down in
aRylands v. Fletcher (1868)
bHadley v. Baxendale (1854)
cScott v. Shepherd (1773)
dWagon Mound (No. 1) (1961)
Answer: D
In Overseas Tankship (UK) Ltd. v. Morts Dock (The Wagon Mound No. 1), the Privy Council held that reasonable foreseeability of the kind of harm is the test of remoteness, disapproving the directness test of Re Polemis.
Vicarious liability of a master for the torts of his servant is generally founded on the principle that the master is liable
aonly for torts committed by the servant in the course of employment
bfor every act of the servant, whether connected with the employment or not
conly where the master has expressly authorised the wrongful act
donly where the master is personally negligent
Answer: A
A master is vicariously liable for torts committed by his servant in the course of employment, even if the particular act was unauthorised, provided it was a wrongful mode of doing an authorised act; acts wholly outside the course of employment do not attract this liability.
In an action for malicious prosecution, which of the following is NOT a necessary ingredient to be proved by the plaintiff?
aThe defendant prosecuted the plaintiff
bThe prosecution ended in the plaintiff's favour
cThe plaintiff suffered no damage at all
dThe prosecution was without reasonable and probable cause and was malicious
Answer: C
Malicious prosecution requires a prosecution by the defendant, ending in the plaintiff's favour, without reasonable and probable cause, actuated by malice, and resulting in damage to the plaintiff. Proof of damage is essential, so 'no damage at all' is not an ingredient.
Defamation in a permanent or written form, such as in print, is termed
alibel
bslander
cinnuendo
dmalice in fact
Answer: A
Libel is defamation in a permanent form (e.g., writing, print, picture), while slander is defamation in a transient form such as spoken words. Libel is actionable per se under the common law.
The rule of strict liability for the escape of a dangerous thing brought upon land by a non-natural use was first laid down in which case?
aRylands v. Fletcher
bDonoghue v. Stevenson
cAshby v. White
dNichols v. Marsland
Answer: A
In Rylands v. Fletcher (1868), the House of Lords held that a person who, for his own purposes, brings on his land and collects anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, is strictly liable for the damage caused by its escape, irrespective of negligence.
Which of the following is NOT an essential ingredient of the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher?
aBringing of a dangerous thing on the land
bNon-natural use of the land
cNegligence on the part of the defendant
dEscape of the dangerous thing
Answer: C
The rule imposes strict liability; the plaintiff need not prove negligence. The essentials are a dangerous thing brought on the land, a non-natural use, and an escape causing damage.
Which one of the following is recognised as a valid exception (defence) to the rule of strict liability in Rylands v. Fletcher?
aAct of God
bInevitable accident in every case
cCarelessness of a servant
dStatutory permission with negligence
Answer: A
Act of God (vis major), as recognised in Nichols v. Marsland, is an established exception to the rule, along with plaintiff's own default, consent, act of a stranger and statutory authority.
The principle of 'absolute liability', under which an enterprise engaged in a hazardous activity is liable without exceptions, was propounded by the Supreme Court of India in
aRylands v. Fletcher
bDonoghue v. Stevenson
cM.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak case)
dBhim Singh v. State of J&K
Answer: C
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (AIR 1987 SC 965), arising out of the oleum gas leak from Shriram Foods, the Supreme Court evolved the rule of absolute liability, going beyond Rylands v. Fletcher and refusing to recognise its exceptions.
The modern law of negligence and the 'neighbour principle' to determine the existence of a duty of care owe their origin to
aRylands v. Fletcher
bDonoghue v. Stevenson
cGloucester Grammar School case
dAshby v. White
Answer: B
In Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932), the House of Lords laid down the neighbour principle, holding that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer of his product.
The leading case illustrating the maxim 'injuria sine damno', where a qualified voter was wrongfully prevented from casting his vote, is
aGloucester Grammar School case
bMogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor
cNichols v. Marsland
dAshby v. White
Answer: D
In Ashby v. White (1703), the plaintiff voter was wrongfully refused the right to vote; though no actual loss resulted, the violation of his legal right was held actionable on the principle ubi jus ibi remedium.
The Gloucester Grammar School case (1410) is a classic illustration of which of the following maxims?
aInjuria sine damno
bRes ipsa loquitur
cVolenti non fit injuria
dDamnum sine injuria
Answer: D
In the Gloucester Grammar School case, the rival schoolmaster caused financial loss through lawful competition but violated no legal right, illustrating damnum sine injuria (damage without legal injury), for which no action lies.
Under the defence of 'volenti non fit injuria', no remedy lies in tort where the plaintiff
ahas voluntarily consented to suffer the harm
bhas suffered harm by an act of God
chas suffered harm through inevitable accident
dhas been harmed by a stranger's wrongful act
Answer: A
Volenti non fit injuria means that one who voluntarily consents to suffer harm cannot complain of it; the consent must be free and given with knowledge of the risk.
aany unexpected injury which could have been foreseen and avoided
bthe negligent act of a third party
can operation of natural forces so extraordinary that no human foresight could provide against it
dan ordinary occurrence of nature that a prudent man could anticipate
Answer: C
Act of God (vis major) is a working of natural forces so unexpected and extraordinary that no reasonable human foresight or prudence could guard against it, as illustrated in Nichols v. Marsland.
In Nichols v. Marsland, the defendant was held NOT liable for the escape of water from artificial lakes because the flooding was caused by
aan extraordinary rainfall amounting to an act of God
bthe plaintiff's own default
cthe wrongful act of a stranger
dstatutory authority
Answer: A
In Nichols v. Marsland (1876), an extraordinary and unforeseeable rainfall burst the defendant's artificial lakes; the court held the escape was due to an act of God, exonerating the defendant from liability under Rylands v. Fletcher.
The legal maxim that translates as 'where there is a right, there is a remedy' is
ares ipsa loquitur
bubi jus ibi remedium
cqui facit per alium facit per se
dvolenti non fit injuria
Answer: B
Ubi jus ibi remedium means that wherever the law confers a right, it also provides a remedy for its infringement; this principle was reaffirmed in Ashby v. White.
The maxim by which a master is held liable for the torts of his servant committed in the course of employment is best expressed by
aqui facit per alium facit per se
bdamnum sine injuria
cinjuria sine damno
dactio personalis moritur cum persona
Answer: A
Vicarious liability of a master for the acts of his servant rests on the maxim qui facit per alium facit per se (he who acts through another acts himself), provided the wrong was committed in the course of employment.
Which of the following is an essential element for the tort of negligence as established in Donoghue v. Stevenson?
aExistence of a duty of care, its breach, and resulting damage
bVoluntary consent of the plaintiff to the harm
cEscape of a dangerous thing from the defendant's land
dA non-natural use of land by the defendant
Answer: A
Negligence requires a legal duty of care owed to the plaintiff, a breach of that duty by the defendant, and consequential damage to the plaintiff; Donoghue v. Stevenson established the duty-of-care element.
In the Oleum Gas Leak case, the Supreme Court held that the measure of compensation payable by an enterprise carrying on a hazardous activity should be
alimited strictly to the principle in Rylands v. Fletcher
bcorrelated to the magnitude and capacity of the enterprise so as to have a deterrent effect
cconfined only to medical expenses of the victims
dpayable only if negligence is proved against the enterprise
Answer: B
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987), the Court held that compensation under absolute liability must be correlated to the magnitude and financial capacity of the enterprise so that it acts as a deterrent.
In which of the following cases was the rule of strict liability, holding that a person who brings onto his land and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes is prima facie liable for the natural consequences of its escape, first laid down?
aDonoghue v. Stevenson
bAshby v. White
cRylands v. Fletcher
dBird v. Jones
Answer: C
The rule of strict liability was laid down in Rylands v. Fletcher (1868), where the defendant was held liable for the escape of water from a reservoir built on his land, irrespective of negligence, this being a non-natural use of land.
The principle of 'absolute liability', under which an enterprise carrying on a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity is liable without any of the exceptions available under strict liability, was propounded by the Supreme Court of India in
aRylands v. Fletcher
bM.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Gas Leak case)
cGloucester Grammar School case
dDonoghue v. Stevenson
Answer: B
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086, the Supreme Court evolved the principle of absolute liability, which unlike the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher admits no exceptions such as act of God or act of a stranger.
The maxim 'injuria sine damno', meaning injury without damage, was applied to hold a returning officer liable for wrongfully refusing to register a duly tendered vote, even though the candidate the voter supported was elected, in the case of
aAshby v. White
bMogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor
cGloucester Grammar School case
dBradford Corporation v. Pickles
Answer: A
In Ashby v. White (1703), the plaintiff was wrongfully prevented from voting but suffered no monetary loss; the violation of his legal right was held actionable, illustrating injuria sine damno.
The maxim 'damnum sine injuria', meaning damage without legal injury, is best illustrated by which of the following cases, where a rival schoolmaster who set up a competing school and caused loss to the plaintiff school was held not liable?
aAshby v. White
bBhim Singh v. State of J & K
cGloucester Grammar School case
dRylands v. Fletcher
Answer: C
In the Gloucester Grammar School case (1410), a rival school caused financial loss to the plaintiff through lawful competition; as no legal right was infringed, no action lay, illustrating damnum sine injuria.
The 'neighbour principle' in the law of negligence, requiring a person to take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions reasonably foreseeable as likely to injure his neighbour, was enunciated by Lord Atkin in
aGrant v. Australian Knitting Mills
bRyland v. Fletcher
cHeaven v. Pender
dDonoghue v. Stevenson
Answer: D
In Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] AC 562, where a decomposed snail was found in a ginger beer bottle, Lord Atkin laid down the neighbour principle as the foundation of the modern law of negligence.
An MLA of Jammu & Kashmir was illegally detained by the police to prevent him from attending a session of the Legislative Assembly and was awarded exemplary damages of Rs. 50,000 by the Supreme Court. This was held in
aRudal Sah v. State of Bihar
bBhim Singh v. State of Jammu & Kashmir
cNilabati Behera v. State of Orissa
dD.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal
Answer: B
In Bhim Singh v. State of J & K, AIR 1986 SC 494, the Supreme Court held the wrongful detention to be a violation of Articles 21 and 22(2) and awarded Rs. 50,000 as exemplary damages.
Under the maxim 'volenti non fit injuria', the defence of consent does NOT avail the defendant in which one of the following situations?
aWhere the plaintiff is a spectator injured at a motor race to which he had voluntarily come
bWhere the plaintiff, a rescuer, is injured while voluntarily intervening to avert danger created by the defendant's negligence
cWhere the plaintiff agreed in advance to undergo a risky surgical operation
dWhere the plaintiff knowingly entered premises bearing a clear warning of danger
Answer: B
In rescue cases such as Haynes v. Harwood (1935), the defence of volenti non fit injuria does not apply, since the rescuer acts under a legal or moral duty and does not freely assume the risk.
Law Mock is an independent preparation resource and is not affiliated with any High Court, Public Service Commission, or government body. All exam information is sourced from official notifications and is updated periodically.