5 of 100 marks
AIBE 22: Torts, Motor Vehicles & Consumer Protection
This subject carries 5 marks of the 100-mark paper — a mid-weight subject. Section 45 has 20 questions on it, four times the official count.
What to carry, and where to tab
Bring the Consumer Protection Act 2019, unmarked. Blank index tabs only — anything written on a tab can get the book confiscated. These are the parts this subject actually draws from:
- CPA 2019, Chapter I
- CPA 2019, Chapter III
- CPA 2019, Chapter IV
- CPA 2019, Chapter V
- CPA 2019, Chapter VI
- Law of Torts
- Law of Torts — no bare act; carry a reference list
- Law of Torts; BNS Chapter XIX
- MV Act, Chapter XI
- MV Act, Chapter XII
Provisions that recur
- Common law
- Common law / Art. 21
- § 164 MV Act
- § 166 MV Act
- § 166(3) MV Act
- § 146 MV Act
- § 2(7) CPA 2019
- § 34 CPA 2019
- § 10 CPA 2019
- Chapter VI, CPA 2019
- § 69 CPA 2019
- Chapter V, CPA 2019
- § 2(42) CPA 2019
- Common law / § 356 BNS
Sample questions
Three of the 20, with full explanations. The first ten are free in the app.
The maxim 'res ipsa loquitur' means:
- Let the buyer beware
- No one is judge in his own cause
- A matter judged
- The thing speaks for itself
Answer & explanation
The thing speaks for itself
It is a rule of evidence in negligence: where the accident is such as would not ordinarily occur without negligence and the thing was under the defendant's control, negligence is inferred and the burden shifts.
The rule in Rylands v. Fletcher imposes liability for:
- Only intentional harm
- All accidents on one's premises
- Breach of contract
- Escape of a dangerous thing brought onto land in the course of a non-natural user
Answer & explanation
Escape of a dangerous thing brought onto land in the course of a non-natural user
The rule is one of strict liability, subject to exceptions including act of God, act of a stranger, plaintiff's own default, statutory authority and consent of the plaintiff.
The principle of absolute liability, without the exceptions available under Rylands v. Fletcher, was laid down in:
- Rylands v. Fletcher (1868)
- M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)
- Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932)
- Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action (1996)
Answer & explanation
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987)
The Oleum Gas Leak case held that an enterprise engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity owes an absolute and non-delegable duty, and the measure of compensation must be correlated to the magnitude and capacity of the enterprise.
Practise
Ten questions in Torts, Motor Vehicles & Consumer Protection free, no card. Each answer cited to both codes with a line telling you where to look in the bare act.
Practise Torts, Motor Vehicles & Consumer Protection