AILET (All India Law Entrance Test) Legal-Aptitude: Questions 92 - 94 of 254

Access detailed explanations (illustrated with images and videos) to 254 questions. Access all new questions- tracking exam pattern and syllabus. View the complete topic-wise distribution of questions. Unlimited Access, Unlimited Time, on Unlimited Devices!

View Sample Explanation or View Features.

Rs. 200.00 -OR-

How to register? Already Subscribed?

Question 92

Appeared in Year: 2015

Question

MCQ▾

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Any direct physical interference with goods in somebody՚s possession without lawful justification is called trespass of goods.

FACTUAL SITUATION: Z purchased a car from a person who had no title to it and sent it to a garage for repair. X believing wrongly that the car was his, removed it from the garage. Has X committed any offence?

Choices

Choice (4)Response

a.

X cannot be held responsible for trespass of goods as he was under a wrong belief.

b.

X can be held responsible for trespass of goods.

c.

Z has no right over the car as he purchased it from a person who had no title over it.

d.

None of the above

Question 93

Appeared in Year: 2012

Question

MCQ▾

The “Right to Information” (RTI) is a

Choices

Choice (4)Response

a.

Fundamental Right

b.

Statutory Right

c.

Constitutional Right

d.

Contractual Right

Question 94

Appeared in Year: 2014

Question

MCQ▾

LEGAL PRINCIPLE: A person is responsible for that which he could have reasonably foreseen or prevented.

FACTUAL SITUATION: A chemist sold a hair conditioner to Jyoti. The conditioner was locally manufactured and the contents, harmful chemicals, were listed on the bottle. The chemist, however, represented to Jyoti that the chemicals used were harmless and beneficial for the hair. On using it, Jyoti՚s hair was badly damaged and she had to get hair treatment done for the same. Jyoti filed a complaint against the chemist. Will the chemist be liable?

Choices

Choice (4)Response

a.

Yes, as he should have informed Jyoti that the ingredients are not known.

b.

Not liable as it is a natural tendency of shopkeepers to extol the virtues of the product they are selling.

c.

Liable because he was aware of the side effects of the ingredients.

d.

Not liable because it was the buyer՚s duty to be aware about the product she is buying.

Developed by: