The Supreme Court allowed compensation of Rs. 23.84 lakhs and later allowed additional compensation of Rs. 47 lakhs to the farmers whose crops got damaged, being irrigated by subsoil water drawn from a stream which was polluted from untreated effluents of 22 industries. It was decided in the case of:

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

In which one of the following cases did the Court of Exchequer explain the principle of res ipsa loquitur?

A. Scott v. London & St. Katharine Docks Co.

B. Hedley Byrne Co. Ltd. v. Heller & Partners

C. Derry v. Peek

D. Cann v. Willson

Communications addressed by a husband to his wife are not, except with his consent, admissible in evidence by virtue of

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