Question:
"A,' the defendant who pulled away the chair of the speaker who was about to sit as a result of which the speaker fell down and sustained bodily injuries may be sued for committing:
"A,' the defendant who pulled away the chair of the speaker who was about to sit as a result of which the speaker fell down and sustained bodily injuries may be sued for committing:
Updated On: Aug 5, 2024
- Tort of battery
- Tort of Assault
- Both (a) & (b)
- None of the above
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The correct option is (A): Tort of battery.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top Questions on Law of Torts
- Consider the following statements:
i. Libel is addressed to the eye.
ii. Slander is addressed to the ear.
iii. Slander is a criminal wrong. Choose the correct answer.- AILET PhD - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Law of Torts
- The following is incorrect about malicious prosecution in tort law:
- AILET LLM - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Law of Torts
- What must be shown before the court to obtain an injunction to stop nuisance?
- AILET PhD - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Law of Torts
- Which of the following is NOT necessary to establish the liability for negligence under law of torts?
- AILET PhD - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Law of Torts
- ‘Malice in fact’ means:
- AILET PhD - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Law of Torts
View More Questions
Questions Asked in AILET LLM exam
- As per the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, which of the following statement is false?
- AILET LLM - 2025
- Family Laws
- In relation to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 match the following and identify correct answer:Select the correct option:
(A) Conditions for a Hindu Marriage (i) Section 13 (B) Registration of Hindu Marriage (ii) Section 10 (C) Judicial Separation (iii) Section 5 (D) Divorce (iv) Section 8 - AILET LLM - 2025
- Family Laws
- Match the followingSelect the correct option
I. Arbitration of excepted matters 1. A. Ayyasamy v. A. Paramasivam, (2016) 10 SCC 386 II. Conditional Arbitration Clauses 2. In re - Interplay between Arb Agreements and Stamp Act 2023 INSC 1066 III. Separability of Arbitration Agreement - Kompetenz Kompetenz 3. Vulcan Insurance Co Ltd v. Maharaj Singh and Anr (1976) 1 SCC 943 IV. Arbitrability of fraud 4. Mitra Guha Builders (India) Co v. ONGC (2020) 3 SCC 222 - AILET LLM - 2025
- Arbitration Law
- Match the followingSelect the correct option:
I. Uti Possidetis 1. Principle in customary international law providing that where there has been a fundamental change of circumstances since an agreement was concluded, a party to that agreement may withdraw from or terminate it. II. Pacta Sunt Servanda 2. Two or more states equally exercise sovereignty with respect to a territory and its inhabitants. III. Condominium 3. Doctrine that territory remains with the possessor state at the end of war or occupation unless otherwise determined by a treaty or an agreement. IV. Rebus Sic Stantibus 4. Proposition that treaties are binding upon the parties to them and must be performed in good faith. - AILET LLM - 2025
- Public International Law
- “Associate company” in relation to another company means a company:
- AILET LLM - 2025
- Company Law
View More Questions