KSLU Solved Question Papers
Law of Torts
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 2
2011 Jan Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 2 Law of Torts 2011 Jan Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2011 Jan examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2011 Jan examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2011 Jan examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 20 questions answered
Instructions printed on the paper
- N.B. (1) Answer all 5 Questions. (2) Answers should be written either in English or Kannada completely. (3) Figures to the right indicate marks.
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1
Unit I
(a)Define tort and distinguish it from crime and contract.[15]
Answer
For full marks, cover: the meaning and nature of a tort; its definitions (statutory, Salmond, Winfield, Fraser); its essentials in brief; tort and crime, with a table, the wrongs that are both, and how the two proceedings run together; tort and contract, with a table and the cases where both arise; a short note on breach of trust and quasi-contract; an illustration; a conclusion.
Nature of a tort
The word tort comes from the Latin tortum, "twisted", and reached English through the French word for a wrong. In law a tort is a civil wrong done by one person to another, for which the person wronged may sue for compensation.
Four features describe its nature.
- It is a private wrong. It injures an individual, who brings the action in his own name.
- Its main remedy is unliquidated damages, that is, money fixed by the court rather than agreed in advance. An injunction is also available.
- It protects rights good against everyone, such as the right to bodily safety, to reputation and to the enjoyment of land.
- It is largely judge-made and still growing. In India it is not codified. In Jay Laxmi Salt Works (P) Ltd v. State of Gujarat, (1994) 4 SCC 1, the Supreme Court said the law of torts is a developing law whose frontiers cannot be strictly barricaded.
Definitions
- Statutory. Section 2(m) of the Limitation Act 1963 defines a tort as "a civil wrong which is not exclusively the breach of a contract or the breach of a trust".
- Salmond. A tort is a civil wrong for which the remedy is a common law action for unliquidated damages. It must not be exclusively the breach of a contract, a trust or another merely equitable obligation.
- Winfield. Tortious liability arises from the breach of a duty primarily fixed by law. The duty is owed to persons generally, and its breach is redressible by an action for unliquidated damages.
- Fraser. A tort is an infringement of a right in rem of a private individual, giving the injured party a right to compensation.
Taken together, the definitions show three things. A tort is a civil wrong, its duty is imposed by law, and its usual remedy is damages assessed by the court. Each definition also has a gap. The statutory one says only what a tort is not. Salmond's defines the wrong by its remedy. Winfield's duty is not always owed to everyone, since in negligence it is owed only to those who could foreseeably be harmed.
Essentials in brief
A tort needs a wrongful act or omission that causes legal damage, meaning the violation of a legal right. The law must also give a remedy for it. Actual loss is not always needed. In Ashby v. White (1703), as recounted in Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta, AIR 1994 SC 787, a voter wrongly refused his vote won damages though he lost nothing.
Part A: Tort and crime
A crime is a wrong against the community as a whole. The State prosecutes it and the court punishes the offender. A tort is a wrong against an individual, who sues for compensation.
| Basis | Tort | Crime |
|---|---|---|
| Whom it injures | A private person | Society at large |
| Who brings the case | The injured person | The State |
| Proceeding | Civil suit or claim | Prosecution |
| Aim | Compensation | Punishment |
| Outcome | Damages or injunction | Fine or imprisonment |
| Standard of proof | Balance of probabilities | Beyond reasonable doubt |
| Settlement | Parties may settle freely | Only compoundable offences |
| Where the law is found | Mostly case law | Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 and other statutes |
Wrongs that are both. Many acts are at once a tort and a crime:
- assault and battery, punishable under section 131 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023;
- false imprisonment, which matches wrongful confinement under section 127;
- defamation, an offence under section 356. In Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, (2016) 7 SCC 221, the Supreme Court upheld criminal defamation alongside the civil action;
- public nuisance, an offence under section 270, and a tort for a person who suffers special damage.
The two run independently. A victim may sue for damages and the State may also prosecute. An acquittal does not end the civil claim, because the civil standard of proof is lower. Seriousness is not the dividing line. A careless escape of gas that kills many people may be only a tort, while stealing a bicycle is a crime.
Part B: Tort and contract
In contract, the parties create their own duties by agreement, and a party is liable for breaking his promise. In tort, the duty is imposed by law on everyone, whether or not they agreed to anything.
The Supreme Court drew exactly this line in Jay Laxmi Salt Works. The State had built a reclamation bund so carelessly that the appellant's salt works were flooded. The Court explained that a duty in tort is fixed by law and owed to persons generally. A contractual duty is fixed by the parties and owed only to specified persons. The salt works had no contract with the State, yet the Court granted a decree for damages in tort.
| Basis | Tort | Contract |
|---|---|---|
| Origin of the duty | The law | The parties' agreement |
| To whom the duty is owed | People generally | The other contracting party |
| Kind of right | In rem | In personam |
| Consent | Not needed | Essential |
| Privity | Not needed | Needed |
| Measure of damages | Unliquidated, fixed by the court | Agreed, or measured under s. 73 of the Indian Contract Act 1872 |
| Basis | Tort | Contract |
|---|---|---|
| Motive | Relevant in a few torts | Irrelevant |
| Limitation | One year for libel, slander, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution (Arts. 73 to 76 of the Limitation Act 1963) | Three years from the breach (Art. 55) |
A tort without a contract. Donoghue v. Stevenson, (1932) AC 562. A consumer who fell ill from a drink bought by a friend had no contract with the manufacturer. The House of Lords held that the manufacturer still owed her a duty of care in tort.
One act, two claims. A patient who pays a surgeon has a contract. If the surgeon operates carelessly, he breaks that contract and also commits negligence. The patient may sue on either ground but cannot recover twice. This is why section 2(m) of the Limitation Act uses the word "exclusively".
Why the distinctions matter in practice
- Who may sue. In contract only a party may sue. In tort anyone to whom the duty was owed may sue, as the consumer in Donoghue v. Stevenson did.
- Where to sue. A tort claim goes to a civil court or to a special forum, such as a Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal or a Consumer Commission. A crime is tried by a criminal court.
- How to prove it. A plaintiff in tort wins on the balance of probabilities. A prosecutor must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- What is gained. A tort claim puts money in the victim's hands. A conviction punishes the offender, though a criminal court may also order him to compensate the victim.
Breach of trust and quasi-contract
Salmond's definition also excludes these. A breach of trust is a wrong to a beneficiary in equity, and the remedy is an account of a definite sum. A quasi-contract arises under sections 68 to 72 of the Indian Contract Act 1872. It obliges a person to return a benefit he received, again a definite sum. A tort, by contrast, gives damages fixed by the court.
An illustration
Kiran hires a taxi. The driver speeds, hits a pedestrian, Lata, and injures Kiran too. Kiran may sue for breach of the contract of carriage or in tort. Lata has no contract, so she may sue only in tort. The State may also prosecute the driver for rash driving, which is a crime. One accident thus produces a breach of contract, two torts and an offence.
Conclusion. A tort is a civil wrong arising from a duty fixed by law and owed to people generally. Its remedy is damages fixed by the court. It differs from a crime, which is a public wrong punished by the State. It differs from a breach of contract, where the duty comes from agreement and is owed only to the other party. The same facts may be all three at once, and each proceeding runs on its own, as Donoghue v. Stevenson and Subramanian Swamy illustrate.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 2 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.