CLAT PG question bank
CLAT PG Law of Torts questions 1-25 of 100, with answer keys and explanations covering negligence, nuisance, defamation, strict liability, vicarious liability, trespass, defences, and damages.
Coverage
Revise core LLB subjects through CLAT PG MCQs, passage-led questions, answer keys, explanations, statutes, and exam-oriented legal principles.
Negligence by professionals is judged with reference to the standard expected from a reasonably competent member of that profession. The law does not insist on the highest degree of skill or success in every case, because medicine and other skilled professions often involve judgment under uncertainty. A doctor is therefore not negligent merely because another doctor might have preferred a different course of treatment. At the same time, a professional must possess the ordinary skill of the calling and must exercise it with reasonable care. Failure to adopt basic precautions, ignorance of ordinary practice, or performance of a procedure without the required competence may amount to negligence. Courts distinguish between a mere error of judgment and conduct that falls below the standard of reasonable professional competence. Thus liability turns on whether the defendant's conduct was one that a reasonably competent practitioner would have considered acceptable in the circumstances.
The most successful expert in the field
A reasonably competent member of that profession
The plaintiff's own expectation
Absolute perfection
Correct answer: B. A reasonably competent member of that profession
The passage clearly says the professional is judged by the standard of a reasonably competent member of that profession.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
A patient suffered an injury
Another doctor would have chosen a different treatment
The case was difficult
The patient later filed a suit
Correct answer: B. Another doctor would have chosen a different treatment
The passage states that mere difference of professional opinion does not itself establish negligence.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
A difficult diagnosis made after reasonable testing
Choosing between two accepted treatment options
Failure to adopt basic precautions expected in ordinary practice
An unsuccessful treatment despite due care
Correct answer: C. Failure to adopt basic precautions expected in ordinary practice
The passage says failure to adopt basic precautions, ignorance of ordinary practice, or lack of competence may amount to negligence.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Caused any loss at all
Fell below the standard of reasonable professional competence
Was criticized by relatives
Occurred in a hospital
Correct answer: B. Fell below the standard of reasonable professional competence
Liability depends on whether the conduct fell below the standard of reasonable professional competence.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Any layperson
A reasonably competent practitioner in the circumstances
The government alone
The most cautious possible expert
Correct answer: B. A reasonably competent practitioner in the circumstances
The passage ends by saying liability turns on whether a reasonably competent practitioner would have considered the conduct acceptable.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Defamation law balances reputation with freedom of speech. Where a statement is an assertion of fact, its falsity may expose the speaker to liability if the other ingredients of defamation are present. But the law separately protects honest opinion on matters of public interest under the defence commonly described as fair comment. This defence does not cover false statements of fact masquerading as comment, nor does it protect comment that is not honestly held. Qualified privilege protects communications made on occasions where the person making the statement has a duty or interest to communicate it and the recipient has a corresponding interest in receiving it. The protection is not absolute; if the plaintiff proves express malice, qualified privilege may fail. Absolute privilege, however, attaches to certain narrowly defined occasions such as judicial proceedings and cannot ordinarily be defeated by proving malice.
False factual allegations
Honest opinion on matters of public interest
Every hurtful statement
Only statements made in court
Correct answer: B. Honest opinion on matters of public interest
The passage says fair comment protects honest opinion on matters of public interest.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Opinion on public affairs
False statements of fact disguised as comment
Honest criticism of public conduct
Strong but genuine views
Correct answer: B. False statements of fact disguised as comment
False statements of fact cannot be sheltered merely by labelling them as comment.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Prior approval of a court
Duty or interest to communicate and corresponding interest to receive
Publication in newspapers only
Absence of public interest
Correct answer: B. Duty or interest to communicate and corresponding interest to receive
The passage states that qualified privilege rests on duty or interest in making and receiving the communication.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Truth
Express malice
Public interest
Judicial setting
Correct answer: B. Express malice
The passage clearly says that if the plaintiff proves express malice, qualified privilege may fail.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Exists on all occasions of public controversy
Can ordinarily be defeated by proving malice
Attaches to narrow occasions such as judicial proceedings and is not ordinarily defeated by malice
Protects only newspaper reports
Correct answer: C. Attaches to narrow occasions such as judicial proceedings and is not ordinarily defeated by malice
The passage contrasts absolute privilege by saying it attaches to narrow occasions like judicial proceedings and is not ordinarily defeated by malice.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Whether an interference amounts to private nuisance depends not merely on the plaintiff's sensitivity, but on the standard of reasonable user of land in the circumstances. An industrial locality may tolerate more noise and vibration than a quiet residential area. At the same time, a defendant cannot justify substantial interference simply by showing that business activity is profitable or common in the neighbourhood. The court considers factors such as duration, intensity, timing, and the character of the locality. Short-lived trifles are not usually actionable, but repeated interference at unreasonable hours may become nuisance even if each individual incident seems minor. The law therefore seeks a practical balance between freedom of use by the defendant and reasonable comfort of the plaintiff.
The plaintiff's personal sensitivity alone
The standard of reasonable user in the circumstances
The defendant's popularity
Only the amount of business profit
Correct answer: B. The standard of reasonable user in the circumstances
The passage says the question turns on reasonable user of land in the circumstances, not on the plaintiff's sensitivity alone.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Every locality equally
A quiet residential area
An industrial locality
Only government land
Correct answer: C. An industrial locality
The character of locality matters, and an industrial area may tolerate more noise or vibration.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Reasonable use of land
Showing that the business is profitable or common in the area
Considering the character of the locality
Examining duration and timing
Correct answer: B. Showing that the business is profitable or common in the area
The passage states that substantial interference cannot be justified simply because the business is profitable or common in the neighbourhood.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Only ownership title
Duration, timing, and intensity
Contractual relations only
Publication to third persons
Correct answer: B. Duration, timing, and intensity
The passage specifically mentions duration, intensity, timing, and locality as relevant factors.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Absolute silence everywhere
A practical balance between defendant's freedom of use and plaintiff's reasonable comfort
Only commercial convenience
Only maximum production
Correct answer: B. A practical balance between defendant's freedom of use and plaintiff's reasonable comfort
The passage concludes by saying nuisance law seeks a practical balance between defendant's use and plaintiff's reasonable comfort.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Strict liability under Rylands v. Fletcher was framed for situations where a person accumulates on land a dangerous thing likely to do mischief if it escapes. Its language is significant: it is the escape from the defendant's control that makes the rule relevant. Where there is no escape, ordinary principles such as negligence may have to do the work. Absolute liability, developed later in Indian law for hazardous enterprises, reflects a different policy. It proceeds on the basis that enterprises engaged in inherently dangerous activities must bear the burden of harm caused by accidents in the course of such activity, because they create special risks to the community. For this reason, the old exceptions of strict liability do not ordinarily help such enterprises. The law thus marks a shift from control-and-escape logic to enterprise-risk logic.
A dangerous thing escapes from the defendant's control
A contract is broken
A statement harms reputation
The plaintiff consents to risk
Correct answer: A. A dangerous thing escapes from the defendant's control
The passage emphasizes that it is escape from the defendant's control that makes the Rylands rule relevant.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Only defamation law
Ordinary principles such as negligence
Absolute privilege
Only criminal law
Correct answer: B. Ordinary principles such as negligence
The passage states that where there is no escape, ordinary principles such as negligence may have to do the work.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
The plaintiff's title to land
Enterprise-risk logic for hazardous activities
The old exceptions of Rylands
The law of contract
Correct answer: B. Enterprise-risk logic for hazardous activities
The passage says absolute liability reflects enterprise-risk logic for inherently dangerous activities.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Because no tort action lies against them
Because the law places the burden of community risk on the enterprise itself
Because escape is impossible
Because plaintiffs are always at fault
Correct answer: B. Because the law places the burden of community risk on the enterprise itself
The passage explains that such enterprises create special community risk, so the burden of accidents is placed on them.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Judicial power to legislative power
Control-and-escape logic to enterprise-risk logic
Civil law to criminal law
Consent to malice
Correct answer: B. Control-and-escape logic to enterprise-risk logic
The final sentence of the passage expressly describes this shift.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
The phrase 'course of employment' does not mean only acts expressly ordered by the employer. If an employee is doing an authorized task in an improper, careless, or even forbidden way, the employer may still be liable if the act is sufficiently connected with the employment. This is because the law looks to the field of activity assigned to the servant, not merely to literal obedience. By contrast, where the employee abandons the employer's business and embarks on a purely personal venture, the connection breaks and liability usually ceases. The real difficulty lies in borderline situations, where courts ask whether the tort can fairly and realistically be regarded as arising out of the employment. The doctrine therefore rests less on verbal formulas and more on practical judgment about the connection between the assigned work and the wrongful act.
Only acts expressly ordered by the employer
Authorized tasks done in an improper or forbidden manner if sufficiently connected with employment
Every private act of the employee
Acts done after resignation
Correct answer: B. Authorized tasks done in an improper or forbidden manner if sufficiently connected with employment
The passage says the employer may still be liable where an authorized task is done improperly or even in a forbidden way, if sufficiently connected with employment.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Literal obedience alone
The field of activity assigned to the servant
Only the employee's personal intention
Only the contract salary
Correct answer: B. The field of activity assigned to the servant
The passage explains that the law looks to the field of activity assigned to the servant, not merely literal obedience.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Performs work carelessly
Abandons the employer's business for a purely personal venture
Uses the employer's tools
Acts under supervision
Correct answer: B. Abandons the employer's business for a purely personal venture
A purely personal venture breaks the connection with employment and usually ends vicarious liability.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
A criminal offence
Arising out of the employment
Supported by written permission
Beneficial to the public
Correct answer: B. Arising out of the employment
The passage says courts ask whether the tort can fairly and realistically be regarded as arising out of the employment.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts
Chance
Practical judgment about connection
Punishing employers always
Proving malice
Correct answer: B. Practical judgment about connection
The doctrine rests on practical judgment about the connection between assigned work and the wrongful act.
Source note: R.K. Bangia, Law of Torts