Question:
Certain legal principles and specific factual situations are provided in each of the following questions. Apply the principles to the given facts and select the most appropriate answer.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE : A statement is defamatory in nature if it is injurious to a person’s reputation and if the statement has been published.
FACTUAL SITUATION : Aneesh had been dating a girl named Amita for three weeks. But he had introduced himself to her as Amay Thakur (who is one of Amita’s friends) and he continued to be Amay for the rest of their relationship. But ultimately the relationship ended badly and Amita being upset and angry at Aneesh started a website named ‘Amay-thakur-is-a-jerk.com’. She created this website so as to warn other girls about Amay Thakur. The real Amay Thakur files a suit for defamation. Decide.
DECISION :
Certain legal principles and specific factual situations are provided in each of the following questions. Apply the principles to the given facts and select the most appropriate answer.
LEGAL PRINCIPLE : A statement is defamatory in nature if it is injurious to a person’s reputation and if the statement has been published.
FACTUAL SITUATION : Aneesh had been dating a girl named Amita for three weeks. But he had introduced himself to her as Amay Thakur (who is one of Amita’s friends) and he continued to be Amay for the rest of their relationship. But ultimately the relationship ended badly and Amita being upset and angry at Aneesh started a website named ‘Amay-thakur-is-a-jerk.com’. She created this website so as to warn other girls about Amay Thakur. The real Amay Thakur files a suit for defamation. Decide.
DECISION :
LEGAL PRINCIPLE : A statement is defamatory in nature if it is injurious to a person’s reputation and if the statement has been published.
FACTUAL SITUATION : Aneesh had been dating a girl named Amita for three weeks. But he had introduced himself to her as Amay Thakur (who is one of Amita’s friends) and he continued to be Amay for the rest of their relationship. But ultimately the relationship ended badly and Amita being upset and angry at Aneesh started a website named ‘Amay-thakur-is-a-jerk.com’. She created this website so as to warn other girls about Amay Thakur. The real Amay Thakur files a suit for defamation. Decide.
DECISION :
Updated On: Aug 5, 2024
- Amita shall be held liable for defamation as she published a statement which was injurious to Amay’s reputation.
- Aneesh shall be held liable as he had led Amita into thinking that he was Amay Thakur and moreover, it was his fault in the first place that made Amita create this website.
- Amita cannot be held liable as she had actually been referring to Aneesh and not the real Amay Thakur.
- Amita cannot be held liable as her act was done in good faith as she intended to warn other girls.
Hide Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
The correct option is (A): Amita shall be held liable for defamation as she published a statement which was injurious to Amay’s reputation.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top Questions on Law of Torts
- It is well recognized that actionable negligence in context of medical profession involves three constituents (i) duty to exercise due care; (ii) breach of duty and (iii) consequential damage. However, a simple lack of care, an error of judgment or an accident is not sufficient proof of negligence on part of the medical professional so long as the doctor follows the acceptable practice of the medical profession in discharge of his duties. He cannot be held liable for negligence merely because a better alternative treatment or course of treatment was available or that more skilled doctors were there who could have administered better treatment.
A medical professional may be held liable for negligence only when he is not pos sessed with the requisite qualification or skill or when he fails to exercise reasonable skill which he possesses in giving the treatment. None of the above two essential conditions for establishing negligence stand satisfied in the case at hand as no ev idence was brought on record to prove that Dr. Neeraj Sud had not exercised due diligence, care or skill which he possessed in operating the patient and giving treatment to him. When reasonable care, expected of the medical professional, is extended or rendered to the patient unless contrary is proved, it would not be a case for actionable negligence.
tracted with edits and revisions from Neeraj Sud v Jaswinder Singh 2024 INSC 825- CLAT PG - 2026
- Legal Studies
- Law of Torts
Match List I (General Defences in Tort) with List II (Leading Cases) and select the correct answer:
List I List II i. Act of God 1. Nichols v. Marsland (1876) 2 Ex. D. 1 ii. Consent (Volenti non fit injuria) 2. Hall v. Brooklands Auto Racing Club (1933) 1 KB 205 iii. Statutory Authority 3. Vaughan v. Taff Vale Rail Co. (1860) 5 H & N 679 iv. Necessity 4. Kirk v. Gregory (1876) 1 Ex. D. 55 - AIBE - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Law of Torts
- Which of the following is not a defence to strict liability?
- TS LAWCET - 2025
- Legal Studies
- Law of Torts
Match List-I with List-II\[\begin{array}{|c|c|} \hline \textbf{Provision} & \textbf{Case Law} \\ \hline \text{(A) Strict Liability} & \text{(1) Ryland v. Fletcher} \\ \hline \text{(B) Absolute Liability} & \text{(II) M.C. Mehta v. Union of India} \\ \hline \text{(C) Negligence} & \text{(III) Nicholas v. Marsland} \\ \hline \text{(D) Act of God} & \text{(IV) MCD v. Subhagwanti} \\ \hline \end{array}\]
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- LLM
- Law of Torts
- Which among the following cases are connected to Volunti Non Fit Injuria?
- CUET (PG) - 2025
- LLM
- Law of Torts
View More Questions
Questions Asked in AILET LLM exam
- 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
- Which of the following statement is correct under the Mediation Act 2023?
- AILET LLM - 2025
- Code of Civil Procedure
- In which of the following cases was it held that “the tribunal has unfettered jurisdiction to adjudicate the dispute raised as well as to decide the legality of an order of the Central Government, or even the opinion of TRAI or any other expert body”?
- AILET LLM - 2025
- Administrative Law
- Match the following offences with the corresponding Sections under BNS, 2023:Select the correct options:
Offenses Sections (A) Voyeurism (1) Section 77 (B) Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman (2) Section 79 (C) Stalking (3) Section 75 (D) Sexual Harassment (4) Section 78 - AILET LLM - 2025
- Administrative Law
- As per the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, which of the following statement is false?
- AILET LLM - 2025
- Family Laws
View More Questions