Question with Answer CLAT Engineering

1. PRINCIPLE: An occupier is not normally liable to a trespasser except in respect of willful act intended to cause him harm or done with reckless disregard.

FACTS: Tony, a richman, had kept a ferocious dog to guard his house. He strictly instructed all his servents not to go near the dog. Further a special attender was hired to take care of the dog. Visitors were warned by a prominent warning sign board about this dog. One day, a 13 year old boy playing in the naighborhood, running after his ball got into the house. The dog attacked him and killed him. Tony was sued for damages.

(a) Tony was not liable because the boy was trespasser.

(b) Tony is not liable because a 13 year old boy ought to have known about the presence of the ferocious dog.

(c) Tony is liable of the negligence of his servant to eep watch on such a ferocious dog during the day time.

(d) Both (a) and (b)

Ans. (d)

1. PRINCIPLE: A master will be liable for the wrongful acts of his servants in the course of employment.

FACTS: Maria was an old widow who opened an account with the Indian Overseas Bank, whereby she should deposit rs.5/- everyday in the bank. Stephen was her neighbour who used to collect the amount and deposit them in the bank. Stephen would get a small commission from the bank for the money deposited. One day it was discovered that Stephen, who had not

deposited the money for more than three months, had vanished with the amount. Maria field a suit against the Bank.

(a) Bank would not be liable because Stephen was not employee of the bank.

(b) Bank would not be liable because Stephen was paid commission by the bank for doing its work.

(c) Bank would be liable because Stephen was paid commission by the bank for doing its work.

(d) None of the above

Ans. (a)

1. PRINCIPLE: The accupier of a premises owes a duty of care to all his invitees and visitors.

FACTS: Devi, who was the owner of a big home with a compound wall, constructed an underground tank to stor water. This was covered by jute bags since the work was incomplete. The postman who came inside to deliver registered letter, fell into this tank and hurt himself There was also a box on the outside of the compound wall, where all the mail could be deposited. The injured man field a suit against Devi clamming compensation.

(a) Devi is not liable, because she did not invite the postman to her house.

(b) Devi is not liable, because the postman could have delivered the letter in the box on the outside of the compound wall.

(c) Devi is not liable, because the postman was required to take care of himself.

(d) Devi is liable because the postman came into the premises in the course of his duty.

Ans. (d)

1. PRINCIPLE: Even if the sovereign functions of the state are discharged negligently the State is not vicariously liable in tort.

FACTS: A' was a trader in gold. There he was arrested by police and was dentained in the police lock up after search. The gold with him along with sundry other things were seized. Later he was discharged. His possessions seized by the police were returned, except the gold. he moved against the State in tort. In the words of Supreme Court,"There can be no escape from the conclusion thet the Police Officers were negligent in dealing with the property after it was seized." One of the Constables was a Muslim. He field with gold to Pakistan.

(a) 'A' succeeded because the servants of the State were negligent and thus caused injury.

(b) 'A' failed bacause the Constables who seized the gold had fled to Pakistan and the gold was not with the State at all.

(c) 'A' failed because the acts of search and seizure by the Police Office were part of the sovereign function of the State.

(d) There was some other relief given to 'A'.

Ans. (c)

miscarriage in its arrival from causes not within the acceptor's control.

(d) None of these

Ans. (c)

For More Question with Answer CLAT Engineering - Click Here