MCQ on Tort

41. M. C. Mehta vs Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 1086 is a decision on
(a) strict liability.
(b) absolute liability.
(c) vicarious liability.
(d) none of the above.

42. ‘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.’ This definition of ‘Tort’ is given by-
(a) Clerk and Lindsell.
(b) Salmond.
(c) Sir Federick Pollock.
(d) Winfield.

43. In which case following, facts were given: The defendants employed independent contractors to construct a reservoir on their land which was separated from the plaintiff’s colliery by intervening land. Unknown to them beneath the site of the reservoir, there were some disused shafts connecting their land with the plaintiff’s mine. The independent contractors were negligent in failing to discover this. Water from the reservoir burst through the shafts and flooded the plaintiff’s mine. The defendants were held personally liable, despite the absence of blame in themselves.
(a) Charring Cross Electricity Supply Co.
vs Hydraulic Power Co.
(b) Rylands vs Fletcher
(c) Smith vs Scott
(d) None of the above

44. In which case the following rule was laid:
‘We think that the true of law is that the person who for his own purposes brings on his lands and keeps there anything likely to do mischief if it escapes, must keep it in at his peril, and if he does not do so, is prima facie answerable for all the damage which is the natural consequence of its escape. He can excuse himself by showing that the escape was owing to thebplaintiff’s default; or perhaps that the escape was the consequence of vis major, or the act of God; but as nothing of this sort exists here, it is unnecessary to inquire what excuse would be sufficient.’

(a) Donoghue vs Stevenson
(b) Rylands vs Fletcher
(c) M. C. Mehta vs Union of India
(d) Nichols vs Marsland

45. The propounder of ‘Pigeon-hole theory’ is
(a) Salmond.
(b) Austin.
(c) Winfi eld.
(d) Clerk and Lindsell.

46. If an act is otherwise lawful, if does not become unlawful merely because the same has been done with an evil motive. This principle was enunciated in
(a) Bradford vs Pickles (1895)
(b) Hollywood Silver Fox Farm vs Emmet (1936)
(c) Christie vs Davey (1893)
(d) None of the above

47. Match List I with List II and select the correct answer using the codes given below the lists.
List-I List-II
(Principle) (Associated case)
I. damnum sine A. Ashby vs White
injuria case
II. absolute B. Gloucester Grammar
liability School case
III. injuria sine C. Stanley vs Powel
damnum case
IV. inevitable D. Rylands vs Fletcher
accident case
(a) I – B, II – D, III – A, IV – C
(b) I – A, II – C, III – D, IV – B
(c) I – C, II – A, III – B, IV – D
(d) I – D, II – B, III – C, IV – A

48. The rule Rylands vs Fletcher is not applicable
(a) when the escape is due to vis major or
act of God.
(b) when the damage is due to the wrong-
ful or malicious act of a stranger.
(c) when the escape is due the plaintiff’s
own fault.
(d) all the above.

49. In which case the following observation was
made by Justice Hankford: ‘Damnum may be abseque injuria, as if I have a mill and my neighbor builds another mill whereby the profit of my mill is diminished. I shall have no action against him, although I am damaged . . . but if a miller disturbs the water from going to my mill, or does any nuisance
of the like sort, I shall have such action as the law gives.’

(a) Gloucester vs Grammar School case
(b) Ashby vs White case
(c) Chesmore vs Richards case
(d) Dickson vs Reutirs Telegram Company case

50. ‘Tort’ which is derived from the Latin term
tortum is
(a) a English word.
(b) a French word.
(c) a Spanish word.
(d) a German word.
Answers –
41. (b) 42. (b) 43. (b) 44. (b) 45. (a) 46. (a) 47. (a) 48. (d) 49. (a) 50. (b)