KSLU Solved Question Papers
Law of Torts
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 2
2022 Apr Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 2 Law of Torts 2022 Apr 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 2022 Apr examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2022 Apr examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2022 Apr 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 80 · 20 questions answered
Instructions printed on the paper
- N.B. (1) Answer all five Units. (2) One essay type question and short note/problems is compulsory from each Unit. (3) Figures to the right indicate marks. (4) Answer should be written either in English or Kannada completely.
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)Explain the concepts of tortious liability. Distinguish between Tort and breach of contract.[10]
Answer
For full marks, cover: Part A, the concept of tortious liability: definitions (Limitation Act s. 2(m), Winfield, Salmond) and the debate on a law of tort or a law of torts. Part B, tort and breach of contract: the source of the duty (Jay Laxmi Salt Works), privity (Donoghue v. Stevenson), consent, remoteness and measure of damages (s. 73 of the Contract Act), motive, and concurrent liability (Achutrao); a comparison table; a conclusion.
Part A: The concept of tortious liability
Definitions.
- Statute. 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".
- Winfield. Tortious liability arises from the breach of a duty primarily fixed by the law. The duty is towards persons generally, and its breach is redressible by an action for unliquidated damages.
- Salmond. A tort is a civil wrong for which the remedy is a common law action for unliquidated damages. It is not exclusively the breach of a contract, a trust or another merely equitable obligation.
A law of tort or a law of torts? Writers disagree about the shape of tortious liability.
- Winfield's wider theory says there is a general law of tort. All harm done without lawful justification is a tort, and the categories are open.
- Salmond's narrower theory says there is only a law of torts: a closed set of named wrongs, such as trespass, nuisance and defamation. A plaintiff must fit his case into one of them.
In practice the two meet. Both accept that courts can recognise new torts, as they did with negligence. Both accept that loss without a legal wrong, damnum sine injuria, is not actionable.
Part B: Tort and breach of contract
1. Source of the duty. In tort the duty is imposed by law. In contract it is created by the parties' agreement.
Jay Laxmi Salt Works (P) Ltd v. State of Gujarat, (1994) 4 SCC 1. The State's reclamation bund flooded and destroyed the appellant's salt works, and the State had been found negligent. There was no contract between them. The Supreme Court explained that tortious duties are fixed by law and owed to persons generally. Contractual duties are fixed by the parties and owed to specified persons. The claim succeeded in tort.
2. Privity. Only a party to a contract can sue on it. A claim in tort needs no such link.
Donoghue v. Stevenson, (1932) AC 562. A friend bought a woman a bottle of ginger beer, and she said she fell ill from its contents. She had no contract with the manufacturer. The House of Lords held that he owed her a duty of care in tort.
3. Consent. A contract rests on the consent of both parties. A duty in tort arises whether or not the defendant agreed to anything.
4. Damages and remoteness. Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act 1872 governs contract damages. They cover loss which "naturally arose in the usual course of things" from the breach, or which the parties knew, when contracting, to be likely. Remote and indirect loss is not compensated. The aim is to give the plaintiff the value of the promise. In tort, damages aim to put the plaintiff back where he was before the wrong. Remoteness is tested by reasonable foresight of the kind of harm.
5. Motive. Motive is irrelevant to a breach of contract. In a few torts, such as malicious prosecution, it matters.
6. Limitation. Under the Limitation Act 1963, a suit for breach of contract generally carries three years from the breach (article 55). Several torts carry one year, such as libel and slander (articles 75 and 76).
One act, both wrongs
The same facts may give rise to both claims. A patient who pays a hospital has a contract. If the hospital's staff are careless, it breaks that contract and also commits negligence. In Achutrao Haribhau Khodwa v. State of Maharashtra, (1996) 2 SCC 634, a mop was left inside a woman's abdomen after a sterilisation operation in a government hospital, and she died. The State was held liable in tort for its staff's negligence. A plaintiff with both claims may choose either, but cannot recover twice. That is why section 2(m) speaks of a wrong that is not exclusively a breach of contract.
Comparison
| Basis | Tort | Breach of contract |
|---|---|---|
| Source of duty | The law | The parties' agreement |
| Owed to | Persons generally | The other party only |
| Privity | Not needed | Needed |
| Consent | Not needed | Essential |
| Damages | Restore the plaintiff's former position | Give the value of the promise (s. 73) |
| Basis | Tort | Breach of contract |
|---|---|---|
| Remoteness | Reasonable foresight | Usual course of things, or what the parties knew |
| Motive | Relevant in some torts | Irrelevant |
| Limitation | One year for several torts | Three years (art. 55) |
Conclusion. Tortious liability arises from the breach of a duty fixed by law and owed to people generally. That is so whether one follows Winfield's wider theory or Salmond's narrower one. It differs from breach of contract, whose duties the parties create and owe only to each other, as Jay Laxmi Salt Works explains. So a stranger to a contract may still sue in tort, as in Donoghue v. Stevenson. The same act may be both wrongs, but the plaintiff recovers only once.
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.