KSLU Solved Question Papers
Jurisprudence
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 5
2022 Oct Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 5 Jurisprudence 2022 Oct 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 Oct examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2022 Oct 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 Oct 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/problem 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)Discuss legal realism.[10]
Answer
For full marks, cover: what realism is and why it arose; American realism (Holmes, Gray, Frank, Llewellyn); Scandinavian realism (Hagerstrom, Olivecrona, Ross); a comparison of the two; merits; criticisms, with Hart's objection; realism in Indian practice (Raghubir Singh, 1989); a conclusion.
Meaning of the realist theory
The realist theory says that law is found in what courts and officials actually do, not in the rules printed in books. A rule matters only because it helps us to predict what a judge will decide. The realist therefore studies decisions, judges and the working of courts, and treats the written rule as one input among many.
Realism grew in the early twentieth century as a reaction against legal formalism. Formalism is the view that a judge reaches a decision by pure logic, deducing it from fixed rules without any choice. The realists said this picture is false. Judges choose, and the reasons for their choices are often not the rules they cite.
There are two branches. American realism is practical and studies courts. Scandinavian realism is philosophical and studies the meaning of legal words.
American realism
- Oliver Wendell Holmes (1841 to 1935) is the forerunner. In The Common Law (1881) he wrote: "The life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience." In The Path of the Law (1897) he defined law as "the prophecies of what the courts will do in fact, and nothing more pretentious".
- Holmes gave the bad man test. To see what the law is, look at it as a bad man would. He cares nothing for morality. He cares only about what the court will do to him.
- John Chipman Gray (1839 to 1915) said the law of a State consists of the rules which the courts lay down. A statute is only a source of law until a court applies it.
- Jerome Frank (1889 to 1957) was the most radical. He called the belief that law is certain the basic legal myth. He said that fact uncertainty, the difficulty of predicting how a trial court will find the facts, makes law far less certain than people think.
- Karl Llewellyn (1893 to 1962) said "what officials do about disputes" is the law itself. He separated paper rules, found in books, from real rules, the practices courts actually follow.
Llewellyn summed up the movement in points. Law is in flux and is made by courts. Law is a means to social ends. Society changes faster than law. Every rule must be judged by its effects.
Scandinavian realism
- Axel Hagerstrom (1868 to 1939) founded the school. He said legal ideas such as right and duty refer to nothing real. They survive from ancient ritual and magic.
- Vilhelm Lundstedt called rights and duties illusions. He judged every rule only by whether it served social welfare.
- Karl Olivecrona said legal rules are independent imperatives. They are commands from no particular person. They work by psychological pressure built up through upbringing, and law is organised force.
- Alf Ross said a statement that a rule is valid law is a prediction that courts will apply it. He compared the word "right" to "tu-tu", a word that stands for nothing but links facts to consequences.
American and Scandinavian realism compared
| Point | American realism | Scandinavian realism |
|---|---|---|
| Starting point | The practice of courts | Philosophy and the critique of metaphysics |
| Method | Empirical study of decisions | Psychological analysis of legal concepts |
| Rights | Not the main concern | Rights do not exist at all |
| What law is | What judges do in fact | Organised force working on the mind |
| Chief writers | Holmes, Gray, Frank, Llewellyn | Hagerstrom, Lundstedt, Olivecrona, Ross |
The Americans were sceptical about rules. The Scandinavians were sceptical about concepts.
Merits of realism
- It is honest about judicial choice. In hard cases judges do choose, and a theory that denies this misdescribes the system.
- It is practical. A lawyer advising a client is making exactly the prediction Holmes described.
- It began empirical legal study. Research on delay, cost, sentencing and who wins grows from realism.
- It helped law reform. Llewellyn drafted much of the American Uniform Commercial Code from real commercial practice.
Criticisms of realism
- It confuses law with evidence of law. A decision is evidence of the law, not the law itself. If law were only what courts decide, no decision could ever be wrong. Yet appeal courts correct lower courts every day.
- It cannot explain a new statute. On the first case under a new Act there is nothing to predict from, yet the Act is plainly law.
- Prediction is not definition. A weather forecast is not the weather.
- It exaggerates uncertainty. Most legal questions never reach court because the rule is clear.
- Hart's objection is the strongest. A judge does not predict his own decision. He applies rules he regards as binding. Hart called this the internal point of view, and realism, which looks only from outside, cannot describe it.
Realism in Indian practice
India has no realist school, but realist reasoning appears in our courts. In Union of India v. Raghubir Singh, 1989 AIR 1933, a five-judge Bench was asked whether the enhanced solatium under the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 1984 applied to older acquisitions. Two earlier Benches had disagreed, so the larger Bench also spoke on precedent.
The Court held that law declared by the Supreme Court binds all courts under article 141, because certainty matters. But it added that binding precedent is limited by the need to re-adjust legal norms to a changed social context. It quoted Holmes, that the life of the law has not been logic but experience. This is realism used within a system of rules, not against it.
Conclusion. The realist theory is a valuable corrective but a weak definition. It is right that rules alone do not decide outcomes, and that the work of courts, delay and facts must be studied. It is wrong to say that rules are therefore not law. The balanced view is Hart's. Rules decide most cases and leave a margin of choice in hard ones. The realists described that margin as if it were the whole of the law.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 5 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.