'No-fault liability' means:

LEGAL PRINCIPLE 'Consent' defined as two or more persons are said to consent when they agree upon the same thing in the same sense.

What does 'consent' include?

LEGAL PRINCIPLE 'Free consent' defined as - Consent is said to free when it is not caused by

I. Coercion as defined in Section $15$

II. Under the influence, as defined in Section $16$

III. Fraud, as defined in $\mathrm{Section} 17$ or

IV. Misrepresentation, as defined in Section $18$

V. Mistake, subject to the provisions of Sections $20, 21$ and $22$

This question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle A careless person becomes liable for his negligence when he owed a duty of care to others.

Factual Situation As the bus was leaving the platform, Kashish rushed and boarded the bus keeping the door open. Ashish, who was standing at the edge of the platform, was hit by the door of the moving bus and injured. Aashish claims compensation from Kashish.

This question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle Whoever by words, either spoken or written brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the government established by law in India shall be punished. However, comments expressing disapprobation of the administrative or other action of the government without exciting or attempting to excite hatred, contempt or disaffection, do not constitute an offence.

Facts A renowned professor of Economics wrote a critical comment on the economic policies of the Government of India in a National Daily. This piece of writing generated academic debate not only in the print media but also on television and Internet. A student of law asked the fellow Indians on a social networking website to assemble at a particular place for peaceful and silent demonstration against the said economic policies on a stipulated date and time. The crowd assembled at that venue and started shouting anti-government slogans. Police arrested the professor.

This question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle Whenever there is an invasion of a legal right, the person in whom the right is vested, is entitled to bring an action though he has suffered no actual loss or harm and may recover damages (compensation).

Facts 'A' was a qualified voter for the Lok Sabha election. However, a returning officer wrongfully refused to take A's vote. Inspite of such wrongful refusal, the candidate, for whom 'A' wanted to vote, won the election. But, 'A' brought an action for damages.

Which of the following derivations is correct?

This question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle In a civil action for defamation, truth of the defamatory matter is an absolute defence. However, the burden of proving truth is on the defendant; and he is liable if he does not successfully discharge this burden.

Facts 'D', who was the editor of a local weekly, published a series of articles mentioning that 'P', who was a government servant, issued false certificates, accepted bribe, adopted corrupt and illegal means to mint money and was a 'mischief monger'. 'P' brought a civil action against 'D', who could not prove the facts published by him. Under the circumstances,

which of the following derivations is correct?

 This question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle Damage without the violation of a legal right is not actionable in a court of law. If the interference with the rights of another person is not unlawful or unauthorised, but a necessary consequence of the exercise of defendant's own lawful rights, no action should lie.

Facts There was an Established School ('ES') in a particular locality. Subsequently, a New School ('NS' ) was set up in the same locality, which charged lower fees, on account of which people started patronising the new school. Because of the competition, 'ES' had to reduce its fees. 'ES' filed a case against 'NS' saying that 'NS' had caused it ('ES') financial loss and thus claimed compensation.

Which of the following derivations is correct?

This question consists of legal propositions/ principles (hereinafter referred to as 'principle') and facts. These principles have to be applied to the given facts to arrive at the most reasonable conclusion.

Principle: Vicarious liability is the liability of the Master or Principal for the tort committed by his servant or agent, provided the tort is committed in the course of employment. The Master or Principal is not liable for the private wrongs of the servant/agent.

Facts: 'X' hands over some cash money at his house to 'Y', who is his (X's) neighbour and is also a cashier in a bank, to be deposited in A's account in the bank. Instead of depositing the money, 'Y' misappropriates it.

Which of the following statements depicts the correct legal position in this given situation?