KSLU Solved Question Papers
Law of Torts
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 2
2022 Oct (70 marks) Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 2 Law of Torts 2022 Oct (70 marks) Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 2 November 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 (70 marks) examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2022 Oct (70 marks) examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2022 Oct (70 marks) 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 2½ hours · Total marks 70 · 12 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.
Q1What is tort ? Explain the essential elements of tort.[10]
Answer
For full marks, cover: a definition of tort; the three essentials, each with cases: (1) a wrongful act or omission, including omissions where there is a duty (Subhagwanti); (2) legal damage, that is, violation of a legal right, with injuria sine damno (Ashby v. White, Bhim Singh) and damnum sine injuria (Gloucester Grammar School, Ushaben); (3) a legal remedy (ubi jus ibi remedium, Rudul Sah); the place of the mental element; a summary table; a conclusion.
Definition
A tort is a civil wrong, other than a breach of contract or of trust, for which the remedy is an action for unliquidated damages. Section 2(m) of the Limitation Act 1963 describes it as "a civil wrong which is not exclusively the breach of a contract or the breach of a trust". In Jay Laxmi Salt Works (P) Ltd v. State of Gujarat, (1994) 4 SCC 1, the Supreme Court explained that a tortious duty is fixed by law and owed to persons generally.
To make a person liable in tort, three essentials must be present.
1. A wrongful act or omission
The defendant must have done some act which the law regards as wrongful, or failed to do something he was legally bound to do.
- Acts. Hitting a person, entering another's land, publishing a defamatory statement or driving carelessly are wrongful acts.
- Omissions. A failure to act is a wrong only where the law imposes a duty to act. A passer-by who does not save a stranger from drowning commits no tort. But an occupier who fails to maintain a building next to a road does.
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Subhagwanti, AIR 1966 SC 1750. The Clock Tower in Chandni Chowk, belonging to the Corporation, collapsed and killed three people. It was eighty years old, and its mortar had a life of only forty to forty-five years. The Corporation had never examined it for hidden defects. The Supreme Court held that this omission was negligence. The owner of a structure next to a highway has a duty to keep it safe.
A morally wrong act is not enough. The act must be one the law treats as wrongful. Ingratitude or refusing to help may be morally wrong, yet no tort.
2. Legal damage
The act or omission must cause legal damage, which means the violation of a legal right of the plaintiff. Actual loss of money is neither necessary nor sufficient.
Injury without loss is actionable (injuria sine damno).
Ashby v. White (1703), as recounted by the Supreme Court in Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta, AIR 1994 SC 787. A returning officer wrongfully refused to receive a qualified elector's vote. His candidate won anyway, so he lost nothing. He still recovered damages, because his legal right had been violated.
Bhim Singh v. State of Jammu and Kashmir, AIR 1986 SC 494. A legislator was arrested on his way to an Assembly session and not produced before a magistrate. The Supreme Court awarded him Rs. 50,000 for the violation of his rights under articles 21 and 22(2).
Loss without injury is not actionable (damnum sine injuria).
The Gloucester Grammar School case (1410), as recounted by the Karnataka High Court. A schoolmaster set up a rival school next door. Boys moved to the new school, and the plaintiff's fees fell sharply. He had no remedy, because lawful competition violates no right.
Ushaben v. Bhagyalaxmi Chitra Mandir, AIR 1978 Guj 13. Devotees sought to stop the screening of a film which, they said, hurt their religious feelings. The Gujarat High Court refused. Hurt feelings, without the violation of a legal right, are not legal damage.
3. A legal remedy
The wrong must be one for which the law gives a remedy, usually unliquidated damages. This rests on the maxim ubi jus ibi remedium, "where there is a right, there is a remedy". A tort is a civil wrong redressed by an action, not merely a wrong in the abstract.
Indian courts have used this principle to create remedies. In Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC 1086, a man kept in jail for over fourteen years after acquittal was awarded compensation in a writ petition. Release alone would have left his right without a remedy.
The mental element
A guilty mind is not a general essential of tort. Some torts need intention, such as assault and deceit. Some need malice, such as malicious prosecution. Negligence needs only a failure of reasonable care. Strict and absolute liability need no fault at all. So the mental element depends on the particular tort.
Summary
| Essential | Meaning | Case |
|---|---|---|
| Wrongful act or omission | Breach of a legal duty, not a moral one | Subhagwanti |
| Legal damage | Violation of a legal right, with or without loss | Ashby v. White; Gloucester Grammar School |
| Legal remedy | An action for damages or other relief | Rudul Sah |
Conclusion. A tort requires a wrongful act or omission in breach of a legal duty, as in Subhagwanti, causing legal damage to the plaintiff. Legal damage means the violation of a legal right. It is actionable without loss, as in Ashby v. White, while loss without such violation is not, as in the Gloucester Grammar School case. Finally, the wrong must be one the law remedies, under ubi jus ibi remedium. A guilty mind is not a general requirement.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.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, and so does the syllabus.
What should we fix or add?
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.