A took an electric tandoor from B & Co. on rent. In the rent agreement there was a clause to the effect that the Co. shall not be liable for any personal injury to the hirer or to any other person while using it. However, due to defect in tandoor, a cook was injured. The cook brought an action against B & Co.
A. Cook cannot succeed as he was not a party to contract
B. Cook cannot succeed as there was an exemption clause in the contract
C. Cook will succeed
D. Cook cannot succeed but A can claim damages
Answer: Option C
This Question Belongs to Law >> Law Of Torts
The 'tort of intimidation' was propounded in
A. Winterbottom v. Wright
B. Pasley v. Freeman
C. Winsmore v. Greenbank
D. Rookes v. Barnard
The maxim 'scienti non fit injuria' means
A. Where there is no fault, there is no remedy
B. Mere knowledge does not imply consent to take risk
C. Mere giving consent does not imply to take risk
D. Scientific knowledge is not enough to cause injury
A. Scott v. London & St. Katharine Docks Co.
B. Hedley Byrne Co. Ltd. v. Heller & Partners
C. Derry v. Peek
D. Cann v. Willson
A. Section 82 of the Evidence Act
B. Section 102 of the Evidence Act
C. Section 122 of the Evidence Act
D. Section 124 of the Evidence Act
Join The Discussion