CLAT 2011

Rules:
A. Whoever intending to take any moveable property out of the possession of any person without that person's consent, moves that property out of his or her possession, is said to commit theft.
B. A person who, without lawful excuse, damages any property belonging to another intending to damage any such property shall be guilty of causing criminal damage.
C. Damage means any impairment of the value of a property.

Facts:Veena, an old lady of 78 years, used to live with her grand-daughter Indira. Veena was ill and therefore bed-ridden for several months. In those months, she could not tolerate any noise and it became quite difficult to clean her room. After she died, Indira hired a cleaner, Lucky, to clean the room and throw away any rubbish that may be there.There was a pile of old newspapers which Veena had stacked in a corner of her room. Lucky asked Indira if he should clear away the pile of old newspapers, to which she said yes. Lucky took the pile to a municipality rubbish dump. While Lucky was sorting and throwing away the newspapers, he was very surprised to find a beautiful painting in between two sheets of paper. He thought that Indira probably wouldn’t want this old painting back especially because it was torn in several pi and the colour was fading. He took the painting home, mounted it on a wooden frame and hang it on the wall of his bedroom. Unknown to him the painting was an old masterpiece, and worth twenty thousand rupees. Before mount the painting, Lucky pasted it on a plain sheet of
paper so that it does not tear any more. By doing so, he made its professional restoration very difficult and thereby reduced its value by half. Lucky's neighbour Kamala discovered that the painting belonged to Indira. With the motive of returning the painting to Indira, Kamala climbed through an open window into Lucky'room when he was away one afternoon and removed the painting from his house.

Which of the following propositions could be inferred from the facts and the Fettles specified?

Rules:
A. When land is sold, all 'fixtures' on the land are also deemed to havebeen sold.
B. If a movable thing is attached to the land or any building on the land, then it becomes a 'fixture'.

Facts: Khaleeda wants to sell a plot of land she owns in baghmara, Meghalaya and the sale value decided for the plot includes the fully-furnished palatial six-bedroom house that she has built on it five years ago. She sells ii to Gurpreet for sixty lakh rupees. After completing the sale, she removes the expensive Iranian carpet which used to cover the entire wooden floor of one of the bedrooms. The room had very little light and khaleeda used this light-coloured radiant carpet to negate some of the darkness in the room. Gurpreet, after moving in, realises this and files a case to recover the carpet from Khaleeda.

As a judge you would decide in favour of

Rules:
A. When land is sold, all 'fixtures' on the land are also deemed to havebeen sold.
B. If a movable thing is attached to the land or any building on the land, then it becomes a 'fixture'.

Facts: Khaleeda wants to sell a plot of land she owns in baghmara, Meghalaya and the sale value decided for the plot includes the fully-furnished palatial six-bedroom house that she has built on it five years ago. She sells ii to Gurpreet for sixty lakh rupees. After completing the sale, she removes the expensive Iranian carpet which used to cover the entire wooden floor of one of the bedrooms. The room had very little light and khaleeda used this light-coloured radiant carpet to negate some of the darkness in the room. Gurpreet, after moving in, realises this and files a case to recover the carpet from Khaleeda.

Assume that in the above fact scenario, Khaleeda no longer wants the carpet. She removes the elaborately carved door to the house after the sale has been concluded and claims that Gurpreet has no claim to the door. The door in question was part of Khaleeda's ancestral home in Nagercoil, Tamil Nadu for more than 150 years before she had it fitted as the entrance to her Baghmara house. 193. As a judge you would decide in favour of

As a judge you would decide in favour of

Rules:
A. When land is sold, all 'fixtures' on the land are also deemed to havebeen sold.
B. If a movable thing is attached to the land or any building on the land, then it becomes a 'fixture'.

Facts: Khaleeda wants to sell a plot of land she owns in baghmara, Meghalaya and the sale value decided for the plot includes the fully-furnished palatial six-bedroom house that she has built on it five years ago. She sells ii to Gurpreet for sixty lakh rupees. After completing the sale, she removes the expensive Iranian carpet which used to cover the entire wooden floor of one of the bedrooms. The room had very little light and khaleeda used this light-coloured radiant carpet to negate some of the darkness in the room. Gurpreet, after moving in, realises this and files a case to recover the carpet from Khaleeda.

Amongst the following options, the most relevant consideration while deciding a case on the basis of the above two principles would be

Rules:
A. When land is sold, all 'fixtures' on the land are also deemed to havebeen sold.
B. If a movable thing is attached to the land or any building on the land, then it becomes a 'fixture'.
Rule C: If a movable thing is placed on land with the intention that it should become an integral part of the land or any structure on the land it becomes a fixture.

Facts: Khaleeda wants to sell a plot of land she owns in baghmara, Meghalaya and the sale value decided for the plot includes the fully-furnished palatial six-bedroom house that she has built on it five years ago. She sells ii to Gurpreet for sixty lakh rupees. After completing the sale, she removes the expensive Iranian carpet which used to cover the entire wooden floor of one of the bedrooms. The room had very little light and khaleeda used this light-coloured radiant carpet to negate some of the darkness in the room. Gurpreet, after moving in, realises this and files a case to recover the carpet from Khaleeda.

Applying, Rules A and C, to the fact situations in questions 192 and 193, as a judge you would decide in favour of

Rule A: An owner of land has the right It) use (he land in any manner he or she desires. The owner of land also owns the space above and the depths below it.
Rule B: Rights above the land extend only to the point they are essential to any use or enjoyment of land.
Rule C: An owner cannot claim infringement of her property right if the space above his or herland is put to reasonable use by someone else at a height at which the owner would have reasonable use of it and it does not affect the reasonable enjoyment of his or her land.

Ramesh’s case: Ramesh owns an at land on the outskirts of Sullurpeta, An Pradesh. The Government of India launches satellites into space frequently from Srihari near Sullurpeta. The Government of India not deny that once the satellite launch travelled the distance of almost 7000 km it passes over Ramesh's property. Ramesh a case claiming that the Government of 1 has violated his property rights by routing satellite over his property, albeit 7000 km directly above it.

Applying only Rule A to Ramesh's case as a judge you would decide

Rule A: An owner of land has the right It) use (he land in any manner he or she desires. The owner of land also owns the space above and the depths below it.
Rule B: Rights above the land extend only to the point they are essential to any use or enjoyment of land.
Rule C: An owner cannot claim infringement of her property right if the space above his or herland is put to reasonable use by someone else at a height at which the owner would have reasonable use of it and it does not affect the reasonable enjoyment of his or her land.

Ramesh’s case: Ramesh owns an at land on the outskirts of Sullurpeta, An Pradesh. The Government of India launches satellites into space frequently from Srihari near Sullurpeta. The Government of India not deny that once the satellite launch travelled the distance of almost 7000 km it passes over Ramesh's property. Ramesh a case claiming that the Government of 1 has violated his property rights by routing satellite over his property, albeit 7000 km directly above it.

Shazia's case: Shazia owns a single storeyed house in Ahmedabad which has been in her family for more than 75 years. The foundation of the house cannot support another floor and Shazia has no intention o. demolishing her family home to construct a bigger building. Javed and Sandeep are business partners and own three-storey houses on either side of Shazia's house. Javed and Sandeep are also Ahmedabad's main distributors for a major soft drink Company. They have erected a huge advertising their products, with the ends supported on their roofs but the hoarding also passes over Shazia's house at 70 feet and a permanent shadow on her terrace. Shazia decides to hoist a huge Indian flag, up to 75 feet, on her roof. She files a case, asking, the court to order Javed and Sandeep to removethe hoarding for all these reasons.

Applying only Rule B to Shazia's case, you would decide in favour of

Rule A: An owner of land has the right It) use (he land in any manner he or she desires. The owner of land also owns the space above and the depths below it.
Rule B: Rights above the land extend only to the point they are essential to any use or enjoyment of land.
Rule C: An owner cannot claim infringement of her property right if the space above his or herland is put to reasonable use by someone else at a height at which the owner would have reasonable use of it and it does not affect the reasonable enjoyment of his or her land.

Ramesh’s case: Ramesh owns an at land on the outskirts of Sullurpeta, An Pradesh. The Government of India launches satellites into space frequently from Srihari near Sullurpeta. The Government of India not deny that once the satellite launch travelled the distance of almost 7000 km it passes over Ramesh's property. Ramesh a case claiming that the Government of 1 has violated his property rights by routing satellite over his property, albeit 7000 km directly above it.

Shazia's case: Shazia owns a single storeyed house in Ahmedabad which has been in her family for more than 75 years. The foundation of the house cannot support another floor and Shazia has no intention o. demolishing her family home to construct a bigger building. Javed and Sandeep are business partners and own three-storey houses on either side of Shazia's house. Javed and Sandeep are also Ahmedabad's main distributors for a major soft drink Company. They have erected a huge advertising their products, with the ends supported on their roofs but the hoarding also passes over Shazia's house at 70 feet and a permanent shadow on her terrace. Shazia decides to hoist a huge Indian flag, up to 75 feet, on her roof. She files a case, asking, the court to order Javed and Sandeep to removethe hoarding for all these reasons.

applying rule only A and B to Shnzia's case, you would decide

Rule A: An owner of land has the right It) use (he land in any manner he or she desires. The owner of land also owns the space above and the depths below it.
Rule B: Rights above the land extend only to the point they are essential to any use or enjoyment of land.
Rule C: An owner cannot claim infringement of her property right if the space above his or herland is put to reasonable use by someone else at a height at which the owner would have reasonable use of it and it does not affect the reasonable enjoyment of his or her land.

Ramesh’s case: Ramesh owns an at land on the outskirts of Sullurpeta, An Pradesh. The Government of India launches satellites into space frequently from Srihari near Sullurpeta. The Government of India not deny that once the satellite launch travelled the distance of almost 7000 km it passes over Ramesh's property. Ramesh a case claiming that the Government of 1 has violated his property rights by routing satellite over his property, albeit 7000 km directly above it.

Shazia's case: Shazia owns a single storeyed house in Ahmedabad which has been in her family for more than 75 years. The foundation of the house cannot support another floor and Shazia has no intention o. demolishing her family home to construct a bigger building. Javed and Sandeep are business partners and own three-storey houses on either side of Shazia's house. Javed and Sandeep are also Ahmedabad's main distributors for a major soft drink Company. They have erected a huge advertising their products, with the ends supported on their roofs but the hoarding also passes over Shazia's house at 70 feet and a permanent shadow on her terrace. Shazia decides to hoist a huge Indian flag, up to 75 feet, on her roof. She files a case, asking, the court to order Javed and Sandeep to removethe hoarding for all these reasons.

Applying only Rule B and C to Ramesh's case, you would decide

Rule A: An owner of land has the right It) use (he land in any manner he or she desires. The owner of land also owns the space above and the depths below it.
Rule B: Rights above the land extend only to the point they are essential to any use or enjoyment of land.
Rule C: An owner cannot claim infringement of her property right if the space above his or herland is put to reasonable use by someone else at a height at which the owner would have reasonable use of it and it does not affect the reasonable enjoyment of his or her land.

Ramesh’s case: Ramesh owns an at land on the outskirts of Sullurpeta, An Pradesh. The Government of India launches satellites into space frequently from Srihari near Sullurpeta. The Government of India not deny that once the satellite launch travelled the distance of almost 7000 km it passes over Ramesh's property. Ramesh a case claiming that the Government of 1 has violated his property rights by routing satellite over his property, albeit 7000 km directly above it.

Shazia's case: Shazia owns a single storeyed house in Ahmedabad which has been in her family for more than 75 years. The foundation of the house cannot support another floor and Shazia has no intention o. demolishing her family home to construct a bigger building. Javed and Sandeep are business partners and own three-storey houses on either side of Shazia's house. Javed and Sandeep are also Ahmedabad's main distributors for a major soft drink Company. They have erected a huge advertising their products, with the ends supported on their roofs but the hoarding also passes over Shazia's house at 70 feet and a permanent shadow on her terrace. Shazia decides to hoist a huge Indian flag, up to 75 feet, on her roof. She files a case, asking, the court to order Javed and Sandeep to removethe hoarding for all these reasons.

Applying Rule C to Shazia's case, you would decide