The rule laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of M. C. Mehta v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 965 (Oleum Case) is
A. Identical with the rule of strict liability in Rylands v. Fletcher
B. More liberal than the rule in Rylands v. Fletcner
C. More stringent that the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher
D. Totally unconnected with the rule in Rylands v. Fletcher
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