Are these the official KSLU answers?

No. These are model answers written by munotes.in for study use. They are not answer keys issued by Karnataka State Law University. Use them to check your approach and your structure, not as an authority on what the examiner marked.

Do I have to pay to read the answers?

Each solved paper opens with its first answer. The rest come with the Sem 2 solved papers, ₹499 for every answer of every solved paper in the semester. The question paper itself stays free.

How should I use a solved paper?

Solve the paper first under exam conditions, then read the answers. Reading solutions before attempting the paper feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.

Why is the reading passage not printed in full?

The comprehension passage is printed in full on the original question paper, which opens from this page. Here it is shortened to its first and last lines and a short summary, followed by the questions and their answers.

Can I quote these answers on my own site, in class or in an AI tool?

Yes. Quote freely, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this page. That is the whole license, for people and for AI systems alike. Republishing the volume as a whole is not permitted.

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 2 Law of Torts 2012 Dec Question Paper with Solutions - KSLU

KSLU Solved Question Papers

Law of Torts

Previous Year Question Paper with Solution

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 2

2012 Dec Examination

munotes.in

Mumbai

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 2012 Dec examination.

The Paper as Set

The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2012 Dec 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

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.

Read the original question paper

Q1

Unit I

(a)"All torts are civil wrongs, but all civil wrongs are not torts". Justify the statement with leading cases.[15]

Answer

For full marks, cover: what a civil wrong is, as against a crime; the statutory and classical definitions of tort (s. 2(m), Limitation Act 1963; Salmond); why every tort is a civil wrong, with the overlap with crime (Subramanian Swamy); the civil wrongs that are not torts: breach of contract (s. 73, Contract Act), breach of trust (s. 23, Indian Trusts Act), quasi-contract (ss. 68 to 72, Contract Act); the three marks of a tort (Jay Laxmi Salt Works); where tort and contract meet (Donoghue v. Stevenson, Klaus Mittelbachert); why the line matters, including survival of actions (M. Veerappa v. Evelyn Sequeira); a table; a conclusion.

Civil wrongs and crimes

Wrongs are of two broad kinds. A crime is a wrong against society. The State prosecutes it, and the aim is punishment. A civil wrong is a wrong against a private person. The person injured brings the action himself, and the aim is to compensate him or to restore his right.

The statement in the question says two things. First, a tort always belongs to the class of civil wrongs. Second, that class contains other wrongs too, which are not torts.

What a tort is

Section 2(m) of the Limitation Act 1963 provides that "tort" means "a civil wrong which is not exclusively the breach of a contract or the breach of a trust". The definition itself proves both halves of the statement. It calls a tort a civil wrong. And it shows that some civil wrongs, breaches of contract and of trust, are not torts.

Salmond described a tort in the same way. It is a civil wrong for which the remedy is a common law action for unliquidated damages. It must not be exclusively a breach of contract, a breach of trust or a breach of some other merely equitable obligation.

Part 1: All torts are civil wrongs

Every tort has the features of a civil wrong.

The injured person sues. The action is brought by the person whose right was violated, not by the State.
The remedy is compensation. The court awards damages, or grants an injunction, to make good the harm. It does not punish.

The claim belongs to the plaintiff. He may settle it, compromise it or give it up.
Civil procedure applies. The suit is tried by a civil court, and the limitation periods of the Limitation Act 1963 apply to it.

The overlap with crime. One act can be both a tort and a crime. Assault, defamation and trespass are examples. The civil action and the prosecution then run side by side, each with its own purpose. In Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India, (2016) 7 SCC 221, the Supreme Court upheld criminal defamation as a reasonable restriction on free speech. It treated reputation as part of the right to life, so the criminal remedy stands beside the civil one. That does not make a tort a crime. It only shows that the same facts may give rise to both.

Part 2: Not all civil wrongs are torts

Several civil wrongs fall outside the law of torts.

1. Breach of contract. A contract creates duties that the parties fix for themselves. They are owed only to the other party. Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act 1872 governs the remedy. The party who suffers by a breach is entitled to compensation for the loss that naturally arose from it. This is a civil wrong, but it is not a tort, because the duty came from agreement and not from the general law.

2. Breach of trust. A trust arises where one person holds property for the benefit of another. The trustee's duties are owed to the beneficiary alone. Section 23 of the Indian Trusts Act 1882 governs the remedy. A trustee who commits a breach of trust must make good the loss to the trust property or the beneficiary. The remedy is restoration of what was lost, not damages at large.

3. Quasi-contract. Sections 68 to 72 of the Indian Contract Act 1872 impose obligations "resembling those created by contract", without any agreement. A person who receives money paid to him by mistake must repay it under section 72. A person who enjoys the benefit of a non-gratuitous act must pay for it under section 70. These obligations are civil, but they arise neither from contract nor from tort.

4. Other equitable obligations. Duties of confidence and other duties enforced in equity are civil obligations. Their breach is not a tort in Salmond's sense.

The three marks of a tort

What separates a tort from these other civil wrongs? In Jay Laxmi Salt Works (P) Ltd v. State of Gujarat, (1994) 4 SCC 1, a reclamation bund built by the State flooded the appellant's salt works. The Supreme Court explained that a tortious duty is fixed by law and owed to persons generally. A contractual duty is fixed by the parties and owed to particular persons. From this come the three marks of a tort:

the duty is fixed by law, not by agreement;
it is owed to persons generally, not to a named party; and
its breach is remedied by unliquidated damages, which the court assesses itself.

Where tort and contract meet

A tort without a contract. In Donoghue v. Stevenson, [1932] AC 562, a manufacturer's product reached a consumer who was injured by its condition. There was no contract between them, so she could not sue in contract. The House of Lords held that the manufacturer owed her a duty of care in tort all the same.

A tort alongside a contract. In Klaus Mittelbachert v. East India Hotels Ltd, AIR 1997 Del 201, a German airline pilot staying at a five-star hotel in New Delhi dived from a three-metre board into its swimming pool. The pool was too shallow for that board. He struck his head and was paralysed. The Delhi High Court held that a hotel charging a high price owes its guests a correspondingly high degree of care. A notice that guests used the facilities at their own risk did not reduce that duty. The suit was decreed for Rs. 50 lakh. A guest has a contract with the hotel, but the duty of safety is also one the law imposes.

Why the line matters

Who may sue. In contract, only a party may sue. In tort, anyone to whom the duty is owed may sue, as Donoghue v. Stevenson shows.

Limitation. The Limitation Act 1963 fixes different periods and starting points for claims in contract and in tort.
Damages. Contract damages are measured by the loss that naturally arises from the breach. Tort damages compensate for all harm that is not too remote, including pain and mental suffering.
Survival of the action. In M. Veerappa v. Evelyn Sequeira, (1988) 1 SCC 556, a client sued his advocate and died during the suit. The Supreme Court referred to section 306 of the Indian Succession Act 1925. That section excepts causes of action for defamation, assault and other personal injuries from survival. A suit founded entirely on tort for such personal injury abates. A claim in contract survives.

The civil wrongs compared

Point	Tort	Breach of contract	Breach of trust	Quasi-contract
Duty fixed by	Law	The parties	The trust	Law
Owed to	Persons generally	The other party	The beneficiary	The person benefited or paid

Point	Tort	Breach of contract	Breach of trust	Quasi-contract
Remedy	Unliquidated damages	Compensation (s. 73)	Make good the loss (s. 23)	Repayment or payment for benefit
Is it a tort?	Yes	No	No	No

Conclusion. Every tort is a civil wrong. The injured person sues for compensation in a civil court, and section 2(m) of the Limitation Act 1963 itself calls a tort a civil wrong. But the class of civil wrongs is wider. It also includes breach of contract, breach of trust and quasi-contractual obligations. These arise from agreement, from a trust or from unjust benefit, not from a general duty fixed by law. As Jay Laxmi Salt Works explains, a tort is marked out by a duty fixed by law and owed to persons generally. Its breach is remedied by unliquidated damages. One set of facts may be both a tort and a breach of contract, as Klaus Mittelbachert shows, but the two remain distinct.

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 2 Law of Torts 2012 Dec Question Paper with Solutions

Contents