CLAT 2008

PRINCIPLES:
(1) An employer shall be liable for the wrongs committed by his employees in the course of employment.
(2) Third parties must exercise reasonable care to find out whether a person is actually acting in the course of employment.

FACTS: Nandan was appointed by Syndicate Bank to collect small savings from its customers spread over in different places on daily basis. Nagamma, a housemaid, was one of such customers making use of Nandan's service. Syndicate Bank, after a couple of years, terminated Nandan's service. Nagamma, unaware of this fact, was handing over her savings to Nandan who misappropriated them. Nagamma realised this nearly after three months, when she went to the Bank to withdraw money. She filed a complaint against the Bank.

Possible Decisions
(a) Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Nagamma.
(b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Nagamma.
(c) Nagamma has to blame herself for her negligence.
Possible Reasons
(i) Nandan was not acting in the course of employment after the termination of his service.
(ii) A person cannot blame others for his own negligence.
(iii) Nagamma was entitled to be informed by the Bank about Nandan.
(iv) The Bank is entitled to expect its customers to know actual position.
Your decision with the reason

PRINCIPLES:
(1) A master shallbe liable for the fraudulent act of his servants committed in the course of employment.
(2) Whether an act is committed in the course of employment has to be judged in the context of the case.
(3) Both master and third parties must exercise reasonable care in this regard.

FACTS: Rama Bhai was an uneducated widow and she opened an S.B. account with Syndicate Bank with the help of her nephew by name Keshav who was at that time working as a clerk in the Bank. Keshav used to deposit the money of Rama Bhai from time to time and get the entries done in the passbook. After a year or so, Keshav was dismissed from the service by the Bank. Being unaware of this fact, Rama Bhai continued to hand over her savings to him and Keshav misappropriated them. Rama Bhai realised this only when Keshav disappeared from the scene one day and she sought compensation from the Bank.

Possible Decisions
(a) Syndicate Bank shall be liable to compensate Rama Bhai.
(b) Syndicate Bank shall not be liable to compensate Rama Bhai.
(c) Rama Bhai cannot blame others for her negligence.
Possible Reasons
(i) Keshav was not an employee of the Bank when the fraud was committed.
(ii) The Bank was not aware of the special arrangement between Rama Bhai and
Keshav.
(iii) It is the Bank's duty to take care of vulnerable customers.
(iv) Rama Bhai should have checked about Keshav in her own interest.
Your decision with the reason

PRINCIPLES:
(1) A person is liable for negligence, if he fails to take care of his neighbour's interest.
(2) A neighbour is anyone whose interests should have been foreseeable by a reasonable man while carrying on his activities.

FACTS: A cricket match was going on in a closed door stadium. A cricket fan who could not get into the stadium was watching the game by climbing up a nearby tree and sitting there. The cricket ball in the course of the game went out of the stadium and hit this person and injured him. He filed a suit against the organizers.
Possible Decisions
(a) The organizers are liable to compensate the injured person.
(b) The organizers are not liable to compensate the injured person.
(c) The injured person should have avoided the place where he might be hit by the cricket ball.

Possible Reasons
(i) The organizers are responsible for the people inside the stadium.
(ii) The organizers could not have foreseen somebody watching the game by climbing up a tree.
(iii)A person crazy about something must pay the price for that.
(iv) The organizers shall be liable to everybody likely to watch the game.
Your decision with the reason

PRINCIPLES:
(1) When a person unlawfully interferes in the chattel of another person by which the latter is deprived of its use, the former commits the tort of conversion.
(2) Nobody shall enrich himself at other's expense.

FACTS: A patient suffering from stomach ailment approached a teaching hospital.
He was diagnosed as suffering from appendicitis and his appendix was removed. He
became alright. The hospital, however, found some unique cells in the appendix and
using the cell lines thereof, it developed drugs of enormous commercial value. When
the erstwhile patient came to know about it, he claimed a share in the profit made by
the hospital.

Possible Decisions
(a) The hospital need not share its profits with the patient.
(b) The hospital may share its profits on ex gratia basis.
(c) The hospital shall share its profits with the patient.
Possible Reasons
(i) The patient, far from being deprived of the use of his appendix, actually benefitted by its removal.
(ii) The hospital instead of throwing away the appendix conducted further research on it on its own and the development of drug was the result of its own effort.
(iii) The hospital could not have achieved its success without that appendix belonging to the patient.
(iv) Everybody must care for and share with others.
Your decision with the reason

PRINCIPLES:
(1) Copying including attempt to copy in examinations is a serious offence.
(2) One shall not take any unauthorized materials into the examination hall.

FACTS: Rohini, an examinee in PUC, was thoroughly checked while entering into the examination hall. She did not have anything other than authorised materials such as pen, instrument box, etc., with her. As she was writing her paper, an invigilator found close to her feet a bunch of chits. The invigilator on scrutiny found that the chits contained answers to the paper being written by Rohini. Rohini's answers tallied with the answers in the chits. A charge of copying was levelled against Rohini.

Probable Decisions
(a) Rohini shall be punished for copying.
(b) Rohini cannot be punished for copying.
Probable Reasons
(i) Something lying near the feet does not mean that the person is in possession of that thing.
(ii) The fact that she was checked thoroughly while getting into the hall must be conclusive.
(iii) Similarities between her answers and the answers in the chit indicate that she used those chits.
(iv) After using those chits, she must have failed to dispose of them properly.
Your decision with the reason

All contracts are agreements. All agreements are accepted offers. Which of the following derivation is correct?

No minor can enter into a contract of work. Working in a shop can be done only by a contract.
Which of the following derivation is correct?

All motor vehicles are required to have third party insurance. Any vehicle not using mechanical device is not a motor vehicle.
Which of the following is correct derivation from the above?

A contract contravening public policy is void. There cannot be a general definition of public policy.
Which of the following is correct derivation from the above?

International Law is the law between sovereign states. A sovereign is the supreme authority not bound by legal constraints.
Which of the following is correct derivation from the above?