Tort (AILET Legal-Aptitude): Questions 19 - 20 of 29

Get 1 year subscription: Access detailed explanations (illustrated with images and videos) to 151 questions. Access all new questions we will add tracking exam-pattern and syllabus changes. View Sample Explanation or View Features.

Rs. 150.00 or

Question number: 19

» Tort

Appeared in Year: 2014

MCQ▾

Question

LEGAL PRINCIPLES:

1. An unlawful intrusion which interferes with one’s person or property constitutes trespass.

2. An easement is the right to use another person’s land for a stated purpose and has been in use for quite some time. It can involve a general or specific portion of the property.

FACTUAL SITUATION: Vijay wanted to construct a shed on his window to stop the water from leaking to his house. The shed was constructed but it protruded in Namit’s house. Vijay claims it is his easementary right. Will Vijay’s claim succeed?

Choices

Choice (4) Response

a.

Yes, because he has a reason to do the same.

b.

No, because there exists no right of easement.

c.

Yes, because right of easement exists.

d.

No, because this is encroachment on Namit’s property.

Question number: 20

» Tort

Appeared in Year: 2013

MCQ▾

Question

LEGAL PRINCIPLES: In a suit for malicious prosecution, the plaintiff must prove the following essentials: 1) That he was prosecuted by the defendant.

2) That the proceeding complained was terminated in favor of the present plaintiff.

3) That the prosecution was instituted against him without any just or reasonable cause.

4) That the prosecution was instituted with a malicious intention, that is, not with the mere intention of getting the law into effect, but with an intention, which was wrongful in fact.

5) That he suffered damage to his reputation or to the safety of person, or to security of his property.

FACTUAL SITUATION: A recovered a large sum of money from Railway Co. for personal injuries. Subsequently, Railway Co. came to know that injuries were not real and were created by doctor B. Railway Co. prosecuted B for playing fraud on the company, but B was acquitted. B sued Railway Co. for malicious prosecution. In the light of these facts which of the following statements is true?

Choices

Choice (4) Response

a.

Railway Co. is not guilty of malicious prosecution because the Co. took reasonable care in determining the facts and honestly believed them to be true

b.

Railway Co. is guilty of malicious prosecution because it acted without reasonable cause

c.

Railway Co. is liable because it acted negligently

d.

All of the above

f Page
Sign In