Subject

Legal Aptitude

Class

CLAT Class 12

Test Series

Take Zigya Full and Sectional Test Series. Time it out for real assessment and get your results instantly.

Test Yourself

Practice and master your preparation for a specific topic or chapter. Check you scores at the end of the test.

 Multiple Choice QuestionsMultiple Choice Questions

11.

Principle: Damage without the violation of a legal right is not actionable in a court of law. If the interference with the rights of another person is not unlawful or unauthorised, but a necessary consequence of the exercise of defendant’s own lawful rights, no action should lie.

Facts: There was an established school (‘ES’) in a particular locality. Subsequently, a new school (‘NS’) was set up in the same locality, which charged lower fees, on account of which people started patronising the new school. Because of the competition, ‘ES’ had to reduce its fees. ‘ES’ filed a case against ‘NS’ saying that ‘NS’ had caused it (TS’) financial loss and, thus, claimed compensation.

Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

  • Since no legal right of ‘ES’ had been violated, therefore, as such, no compensation could be granted
  • Since damage is caused to ‘ES’, therefore, it should be awarded compensation
  •  ‘ES’ should be awarded compensation, as opening of school in competition is not good
  • No compensation could be granted, as reduction in fees is good for the public

A.

Since no legal right of ‘ES’ had been violated, therefore, as such, no compensation could be granted
59 Views

12.

Principle: Whenever there is an invasion of a legal right, the person in whom the right is vested, is entitled to bring an action though he has suffered no actual loss or harm, and may recover damages (compensation).

Facts: ‘A’ was a qualified voter for the Lok Sabha election. However, a returning officer wrongfully refused to take A’s vote. In spite of such wrongful refusal, the candidate, for whom ‘A’ wanted to vote, won the election. But, ‘A’ brought an action for damages:

Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

  • Since no legal right of ‘A’ had been violated, therefore, as such, no compensation could be granted
  • Since legal right of ‘A’ had been violated, therefore, compensation should be granted
  • No compensation could be granted, as ‘A’ had suffered no loss as his candidate won the election
  • Since no fundamental right of ‘A’ had been violated, therefore, as such, no compensation could be granted

B.

Since legal right of ‘A’ had been violated, therefore, compensation should be granted
65 Views

13.

Principle: Ignorance of law excuses no one.

Facts: ‘X’ fails to file his income tax returns for a considerable number of years. The Income Tax department serves upon him a ‘show-cause notice’ as to why proceedings should not be initiated against him for the recovery of the income tax due from him with interest and penalty.

Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

  • ‘X’ may defend himself by taking the plea that his legal advisor had not advised him to file the return
  • ‘X’ would have to pay the due, as ignorance of law and failure to comply with law is no legal ground of defence
  • ‘X’ may defend himself successfully by taking the plea that he was unaware of any such law being in force
  • None of the above

B.

‘X’ would have to pay the due, as ignorance of law and failure to comply with law is no legal ground of defence
65 Views

14.

Principle: Vicarious liability is the liability of the Master or Principal for the tort committed by his servant or agent, provided the tort is committed in the course of employment. The Master or Principal is not liable for private wrongs of the servant/ agent.

Facts: ‘X’ hands over some cash money at his house to ‘Y’, who is his (X’s) neighbour and is also cashier in a bank, to be deposited in A’s account in the bank. Instead of depositing the money, ‘Y’ misappropriates it.

Which of the following statements depicts correct legal position in this given situation?

  • The bank would not be liable because ‘Y’ did not do any wrong in the course of his employment
  • The bank would be vicariously liable because ‘Y’ was the employee of the bank
  • The bank would not be liable because ‘Y’ did not do any wrong
  •  The bank would be liable because ‘Y’ acted as bank’s agent


A.

The bank would not be liable because ‘Y’ did not do any wrong in the course of his employment
82 Views

15.

Principle: In a civil action for defamation, truth of the defamatory matter is an absolute defence. However, the burden of proving truth is on the defendant; and he is liable if he does not successfully discharge this burden.

Facts: ‘D’, who was the editor of a local weekly, published a series of articles mentioning that ‘P’, who was a government servant, issued false certificates, accepted bribe. adopted corrupt and illegal means to mint money and was a ‘mischief monger’. ‘P’ brought a civil action against ‘D’, who could not prove the facts published by him.

Under the circumstances, which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

  •  ‘D’ would be liable, since he could not prove the facts published by him
  • ‘D’ would not be liable. as such an action could curtail the right of expression and speech of press
  •  ‘D’ would not be liable. as media could publish anything
  • None of the above

A.

 ‘D’ would be liable, since he could not prove the facts published by him
71 Views

16.

Principle: Negligence is a breach of duty or a failure of one party to exercise the standard of care required by law, resulting in damage to the party to whom the duty was owed. A plaintiff can take civil action against the respondent, if the respondent’s negligence causes the plaintiff injury or loss of property.

Facts: ‘D’ went to a café and ordered and paid for a tin/can of soft drink. The tin was opaque, and, therefore, the contents could not be seen from outside. She (‘D’) consumed some of the contents and then lifted the tin to pour the remainder of the content into a tumbler. The remains of a snail in decomposed state dropped out of the tin into the tumbler. ‘D’ later complained of a stomach pain and her doctor diagnosed her as having gastroenteritis and being in a state of severe shock. She sued the manufacturer of the drink for negligence.

Applying the aforestated principle. which of the following derivations is CORRECT as regards liability of the manufacturer in the given situation?

  • The manufacturer is liable for negligence, as it owed at duty (to consumers) to take reasonable care to ensure that its products are safe for consumption
  • The manufacturer is not liable for negligence. as there is no direct contract between ‘D’ and the manufacturer. No duty is owed by the manufacturer towards a particular consumer (‘D’)
  • The manufacturer is not liable for negligence because it would otherwise become very difficult for the manufacturers to do business
  • The manufacturer could be made liable under criminal law, but not for tort of negligence

A.

The manufacturer is liable for negligence, as it owed at duty (to consumers) to take reasonable care to ensure that its products are safe for consumption
53 Views

17.

Principle: Caveat emptor ie. ‘let the buyer beware; stands for the practical skill and judgment of the buyer in his choice of goods for purchase. It is the business of the buyer to judge for himself that what he buys has its use and worth for him. Once bought and if the buy is not up to his expectations then he alone is to blame and no one else.

Facts: For the purpose of making uniform for the employees, “A” bought dark blue coloured cloth from ‘B’ but did not disclose to the seller (‘B’) the specific purpose of the said purchase.

When uniforms were prepared and used by the employees the cloth was found unfit. However, the cloth was fit for a variety of other purposes (such as, making caps. boots and carriage lining. etc). Applying the afore-stated principle.

Which of the following derivations is CORRECT as regards remedy available to ‘A’ in the given situation?

  • ‘A’ (the buyer) would succeed in getting some remedy from ‘B’ (the seller)
  • ‘A’ (the buyer) would not succeed in getting any remedy from ‘B’ (the seller)
  •  ‘A’ (the buyer) would succeed in getting refund from ‘B’ (the seller)
  •  ‘A’ (the buyer) would succeed in getting a different variety of cloth from ‘B’ (the seller). But not the refund

B.

‘A’ (the buyer) would not succeed in getting any remedy from ‘B’ (the seller)
62 Views

18.

Principle: A person has no legal remedy for an injury caused by an act to which he has consented.

Facts: ‘R’, a cricket enthusiast, purchases a ticket to watch a T20 match organised by the Indian Premier League (IPL). During the match, a ball struck for six hits ‘R’ on his body. and injures him. He sues IPL for compensation for the medical expenses.

Which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

  • ‘R’ should be compensated as he purchased the ticket to get entertainment and not to get injured
  •  ‘R’ would fail in his action, as he voluntarily exposed himself to the risk
  • IPL would be liable as it did not ensure that the spectators were protected from the risk of such injuries
  •  None of the above

B.

 ‘R’ would fail in his action, as he voluntarily exposed himself to the risk
60 Views

19.

Principle: The transferor of goods cannot pass a better title than what he himself possesses.

Facts: ‘X’ sells a stolen bike to ‘Y’. ‘Y’ buys it in good faith.

As regards the title to bike which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

  •  The real owner cannot get back the bike from ‘Y’
  • ‘Y’ will get no title. as transferor’s (X’s) title was defective
  • ‘Y’ will get good title as he is a bona fide buyer
  • ‘Y’ will get good title, as has not committed any wrong (stolen the bike)

B.

‘Y’ will get no title. as transferor’s (X’s) title was defective
80 Views

20.

Principle: A gift comprising both existing and future property is void as to the latter.

Facts: ‘X’ has a house which is owned by him. He contracted to purchase a plot of land adjacent to the said house but the sale (of the plot of land‟) in his favour is yet to be completed. He makes a gift of both the properties (house and land) to ‘Y’.

Under the aforementioned circumstances, which of the following derivations is CORRECT?

  • Gift of both the properties is valid
  • Gift of both the properties is void
  • Gift of house is void, but the gift of the plot of land is valid
  • Gift of house is valid, but the gift of the plot of land is void

D.

Gift of house is valid, but the gift of the plot of land is void
88 Views