Complete Marathon Part 2 for LAWCET 2026 | 5YDC & 3YDC Full Revision Session ⚖️ | Abhyaas Law Prep

Added: 2026-05-15

[00:00:09]Hello everyone, welcome back to Abbya's law prep. This is part two of your complete marathon for your TS law 2026.

[00:00:17]Here we'll be dealing with your legal aptitude and few of your current affairs and PQS. In last class we have completed legal maxims constitution in thorough with the judgments as well as MCQs. In this video I'll start with contract law and then we'll go further with thoughts criminal law. I'll also discuss uh your important judgments side by side and uh at last we'll be dealing with your legal current affairs. So let's start with your contract law. Contract what is contract? contract is nothing but agreement between two people. Agreement between you and me to sell this particular pen for rupes 5,000 can be an agreement. Agreement uh your contract is nothing but agreement between two parties which is also enforced by your law. So in India uh your contracts are governed under Indian contract act 1872.

[00:01:15]The important fact to know that every contract is an agreement. Every contract uh is agreement but not every agreement is contract. How you'll understand? See A and B agrees to kill C. They both made an agreement to kill C which is agreement but it is not contract. Your contract is something where you two agree for something which is legal legally binding. So this agreement to kill C is an agreement but cannot be a contract because it is for illegal purpose. So we are saying that every agreement cannot be contract but all the contracts are agreement.

[00:02:02]Important fact you should remember this.

[00:02:05]And then coming to definition of contract under section 2H you can remember this under section 2H of your Indian contract act 1872 the definition of contract is given where you say that contract is nothing but an agreement which is legally enforced where your agreement is legally valid or legally enforcable it is known as contract. For example, A agrees to sell a bike to B for 50,000. Similar, it should be legal and there should be consideration.

[00:02:45]Coming to essentials to one uh to become an agreement what important things it should have first it should have offer.

[00:02:54]I'll offer I want to sell this pen for 5,000 rupees. I'm giving you an offer and you say yes, I agree because you like this deal. You you thought okay this pen this is a digital pen and for 5,000 it's a nice deal. So you'll say yes this is acceptance and consideration consideration is nothing but on behalf if I'm giving you pen what you'll give me in return that is consideration it can be monetary concentration consideration or anything previously it used to be b system if you'll give me this I'll give you that that is b system exchanging things monetary consideration is I'll give you this pen you'll give me 5,000 rupees here when you're giving a offer or when you're accepting offer offer, make sure it is of free consent. What do you mean by free consent to without someone forcing you? That is known as free consent. When you're getting into an agreement or contract, sorry, when you're getting into a contract, make sure it is out of free consent by the companion party.

[00:04:00]The uh what do you say the contract or the agreement should be entered by two companion parties. What do you mean by complainant parties? Here we'll actually deal it uh further slides we'll get into depth. Usually it is the person who is capable to get into contract. We have a separate section for it where we'll understand which person is considered as a person component for contract.

[00:04:24]Component means capable and the agreement should be for lawful objective. As we saw killing someone, the agreement to kill someone is not a contract because the objective the object is not lawful and the relationship should be legal. If me and my mother makes an agreement, yeah, every month I will give you 2,000 rupees just for just for like pocket money. You can say is it a legal relationship? No, it is not legal relationship. It is domestic relationship or social relationship. So here the relationship to between the two parties should also be legal.

[00:05:06]Coming to offer and acceptance section 2A defines offer in your Indian contract act where it says that when one person express his willingness important when I'm saying that yeah I am willing to sell this pen is nothing but I am offering you this pen. the agreement I gave you the offer that I'm selling this pen when a person is showing his or expressing his willingness to do something or abstaining from doing something I'm saying I'll not do this or I'll do this nothing but a offer coming to example if I say I will sell my laptop for 40,000 rupees it is nothing but an offer we have types of offer first type is express offer where I say it by my own mouth like by words I will say I want to sell this expressly I'm saying it implied means by conduct by showing it if if you know usually when you are in bus stop standing nearby the bus stop whenever bus stops it is nothing but an implied offer that actually they stopped the bus there nearby bus stop to you can board because you can board it so that implied where from your conduct by your behavior you're showing that you're interested in a sense you're giving an offer by implied offer that is by your conduct general offer where you are giving this offer to public at large what is a public at large there is an offer in a sense an advertisement whoever will find my dog which is missing I'll give them 550,000 rupees so this offer is for public at large whoever will get that dog with My dog will get 50,000 rupees that is offered to public at large.

[00:07:01]Reward advertisements you get me this I'll reward you with so and so amount of money. Section 2B talks about acceptance. Nichma offer key acceptance is if you say yes that is acceptance.

[00:07:14]When the person agrees to the proposal is your proposal or offer is your acceptance.

[00:07:21]There must be uh rules these rules kept in mind to make it an approval. First one is it must be absolute mi why 5,000 can't you do it 4,000 and chipu yes yes if you absolutely say yes then it will be considered as acceptance if you say why 5,000 give me at 4,000 it is counter offer it is not acceptance it must be communicated if I have accepted that offer I should communicate to it communicate it to you it doesn't mean that if in my mind I said okay yes I'll say him later on it will not amount to contract or agreement because until the acceptance is not said not communicated it will not the transaction will not be completed then it must be according to the offer as per the offer's terms and condition the acceptance should be given if they ask me to give acceptance and return I should give the acceptance and return as per the offer so now offer when the offer is treated as completed. When it comes to the knowledge of offery, I have offered you this pen and when this uh thing will be said when it will be known as it is accepted when I will know that you have accepted it. If you in your brain if you think okay yes I like this deal then it will not be acceptance until it is uh into my knowledge until I get to know about the thing. So here acceptance first thing when if you're sending it by post then the acceptance against proposer acceptance against acceptor we have usually we say I uh you the person who are accepting this offer once you send this post from your behalf it is done acceptance is given me postn that yes I have agreed to this offer once you post it from your side acceptance is complete from my side when acceptance will complete when I'll receive the post and I'll read it at that time acceptance will complete consideration what do you mean by consideration something is written so when there is no conc no consideration there'll be no contract this is very much important no consideration no contract so for example A pays is 1,000 rupees for bee's watch. It is nothing but consideration. He can take it.

[00:09:54]Exceptions. Every law has exception.

[00:09:56]Even this has exception. Exception means even if I don't pay you anything in written, still it becomes a valid contract. In what cases? In these cases, agreement valid without consideration.

[00:10:07]If it is given out of love and affection. For example, your will, your parents will be giving will in your name, right? Then it is out of love and affection. Or you can even say gift deed. Someone gifts you out of love and affection that is also known as I mean that is also exception to your consideration. consideration for past voluntary services past I have helped you with something at that time I said okay okay don't give me money in in future if you want you can give me so you want to say me thank you and now you're giving that consideration promise to pay time but debt now I said today I can't pay you but I'll make sure that I will pay in installments or I'll pay in future on so and so date still that that contract will be valid It means timely.

[00:10:56]Okay. After one month I'll pay you.

[00:10:57]There is a time bar within one month I need to pay back. That is a debt. A pull until capacity to contract. So section 11 talks about your competency or capacity of a person to enter into a contract.

[00:11:14]Which person is capable to get into contract? So if you get into a what do you say contract with a minor minor a person who is below 18 will be treated as void. If you do any contract with a person who is below 18 years old the contract will be of no use. So first thing is the person should be major. He should be 18 plus. He should be of sound mind. He should be mentally capable to understand what is going on. And then he should not be disqualified by law. He should not be a criminal. He should not be insolvent. Insolvent bankruptc the person who doesn't have money and he has many apulu but he doesn't have asset. So that is known as disqualified by law. So here we are saying person who is complentant means he should be major he should be of sound mind. He should be he should not be disqualified by the law.

[00:12:09]This is very important judgment to be remembered. Mohiri BB versus Damodar Daz go in this case they said that any agreement with minor is void is show what is void a bin is show void from very beginning the moment you entered into contract the contract doesn't have any legal value because you came into contract within minor now coming to consent we said right if you're giving the consent if you're giving the acceptance make sure it is free without any force without any coercion. So here under section 13 and 14 we say that parties must first thing you should agree upon same thing same sense if I'm talking about pencil it should be this pencil not some other pencil absara pencil or natra pencil it should be about this pencil if I'm saying I want to sell pencil you should also think that I am talking about this pencil if there is no meeting of mind if you are not thinking about same thing it not be considered as contract. There should be consensus added which means both the parties should think about same things. They should agree agree upon same terms. Free consent is uh absent because of I mean when we are talking about free consent it can be absent the free consent will be absent because of these reason one coercion. Someone is forcing you. Someone is uh what you say scaring you that I'll kill you or something like that. That is coercion.

[00:13:48]Coming to undue influence, manipulating you. Brainwash. That is undue influence.

[00:13:54]Fraud fraud. They have said you false things. I said this is digital pencil.

[00:14:01]Uh you need not to do anything. Just you need to push the button. I need to write automatically it will write anywhere.

[00:14:07]That is fraud. Because it is not. It'll only be working on the screen. But I said anywhere you'll write on the walls, everywhere. It is digital pencil and it writes on everything. That is false.

[00:14:18]Misrepresentation.

[00:14:21]Same thing. Fraud in a misrepresentation law. There is no big difference.

[00:14:25]Misrepresentation. I don't know enough about this product. So I gave you some wrong information is misrepresentation.

[00:14:32]Fraud means I wantedly gave you the wrong information.

[00:14:38]Mistake is the same. Mistakenly in a sense you mis uh misrepresentation is the seller saying your wrong thing.

[00:14:46]Mistake is you by mistakenly thought something different and you gave the consent.

[00:14:54]Okay. Now getting into the depth of those concepts. Coercion under section 15 says force or threat. when someone forces you to get into contract. Undo your influence, dominating position used unfairly. Uh if someone is uh if someone has control over your life that when someone important in your life actually manipulates you, use their dominant position unfairly and ask you to get into a contract that is under your influence. Fraud is intentionally deceptional.

[00:15:27]you you actually try to what do you say fraud them or deceive them deceive and do sort of stuff and then misrepresentation is nothing but false statement without intention I don't have intention to deceive you to to actually do a scam but I was not aware of the right information that is misrepresentation now coming to void agreements we said right we we already understood what is void valid last video. So void agreement agreement are void if it is of lawful object we saw right agreement to kill someone is of lawful unlawful objective and then restrainment of marriage you said that I'll only get into marriage if you'll not sorry I'll only get into this agreement if you'll not marry so and so person then that is also wrong you can't say that I'll only purchase your goods if you're not marrying so and so person that is wrong restraint of trade.

[00:16:32]I'm saying you that I'll only purchase your goods if you not sell these goods to so and so competitor of mine that is also wrong. Restaining of trade you you saying them not to trade is also wrong.

[00:16:46]And then restainment of legal proceedings. You saying that we both will enter into contract but you should never you should never file a case in court.

[00:16:57]This is also wrong. Restatement of legal proceedings are also wrong. Wagering agreements going against the state going against the government is also wrong.

[00:17:10]If someone breaches your contract contract breach what remedies or what relief we have. So breach of contract is nothing but failure to perform the promise. I said you I'll sell this pen for 5,000 rupees. You gave me 5,000 rupees. Now I'm not giving you the spend. It is it is nothing but failure to perform the promise. There are two types of breach. One is actual breach and one is anticipatory breach. Actual breach is nothing but you gave me 5,000 now on the date I should deliver this pencil I'm saying no I can't I can't find my pencil that is actual breach anticipated breach you have sent me the money delivery date I said I can't find my pencil by tomorrow I can't deliver it so okar before the due date itself you are anticipating that you can't perform the contract that is anticipatory breach To these breach of contracts you have remedies. One is damages. What do you mean by damages?

[00:18:17]Compensation.

[00:18:20]Compensation and monetary compensation we know right? Fine not fine.

[00:18:24]Compensation. Fine is different. Fine you pay to government. Compensation you pay to victim with whom you have done wrong. So damages is you'll receive compensation. Monetary compensation.

[00:18:34]specific performance that person will say no I like that pen a lot I don't know anything I don't want I don't want the money I don't want the compensation I want the same pen so that is specific performance injunction is to stopping someone to do a thing now injunction can be if someone is troubling you a lot mean to if someone is what you say you you can even say that I am a pen dealer I deal with pens in bulk. So at that time court can ask me to stop all my business transaction that is injunction.

[00:19:11]I can no more uh send pens out of my godam that is in injunction. Stopping court gives you order to stop anything that is known as injunction. Injunction can also be of another type where court asks you to do something. Court can say that you should deliver 200 p rate you deliver it right now. That is also an injunction. There are two types of injunction mandatory and temporary.

[00:19:38]So actually we need not to get into this much of depth. If you know the concept from above it's enough basics are enough for right now. Now coming to your important cases from your contracts.

[00:19:50]This is caric versus carbolic spoke smokeball company which is very much important here. The principle was laid down of general offer.

[00:20:01]We have read right what is general offer offer made to public at large. So here when an offer is made to public it is valid and even advertisements given are also considered as general offer. This company says carbolic smoke ball smokeball company says that whoever will smoke our product will not get any diseases but one person gets it. In the advertisements they have said that we are 100% sure that even though you smoke our product you'll not get any disease.

[00:20:34]I'm not aware about the disase. I don't remember the name but they said that you'll not get the disease. But one person gets it and they file case. They said it was just an advertisement. It was not an offer. Then court have clearly said that advertisement promising reward became a valid offer when conditions were fulfilled. Actually they said that if you smoke our smoke carbolic Smallbox company's product you'll not get this particular disease.

[00:21:02]If you'll get it we'll compensate you.

[00:21:04]And here it actually happened. She smoked it. She got the disease and now she's claiming for the reward or the compensation and they are saying no but the judgment said that conditions were fulfilled and it is treated as general offer.

[00:21:22]Mohiri BB versus Damud Gash. Gosh, we have seen already entering into a contract with a minor is not considered as a valid contract. It is treated as void. So agreement with minor void isue.

[00:21:37]This is very important case. Please remember void is nothing but there will be no legal effect for the contract from very beginning. Start agreement. Starting agreement legal effect.

[00:21:57]Okay. Baffler versus baffler case says that domestic agreements are not contract. Here if agreement is between mother, daughter, husband, wife without any legal intention then it is not enforcable. You can't go and fight in court because this is not for legal purpose. It is social relationship.

[00:22:20]There is no legal relationship. Baffler versus Baffler said there should be legal intention.

[00:22:28]Lalman Shukla versus Gori Duta. This case talking about acceptance requires knowledge of offer. We have seen that example right? I have given an adi advertisement in newspaper that whoever finds my dog will get this reward. Even if you have found my dog and given me without knowing that I have published some uh advertisement in a sense say A publishes in newspaper that if you find my dog you will be given 1,000 rupees. C actually finds the dog without knowing that there was something like this something like this reward is being published in newspaper and it went to A and gives the dog later on it gets to know that in newspaper it was been published. It says this is a general offer, right? I gave you the dog. I want the reward. Here the court or the judge says that person cannot claim reward without knowing reward being offered. It means you can't ask for reward if you don't know at the time you bought the dog or bought the child about the offer being published on newspaper. So it is this principle was been laid down in Lalman Shukla case which is very important which says even to accept the offer you should know that that offer exist.

[00:24:01]Hadley versus backendly here it says damages only for foreseeable loss. What do you mean by foreseeable loss? Now here if I am there and I said that I will deliver these goods by uh next month but because of some delays I couldn't deliver the raw material or good to you because of that there was huge losses in your company all the uh what you say all the offers or the all the contracts you had with others were actually withdrawn because raw material were not reached because uh raw material usually delays time to time this raw material I said I'll deal it 2 days late but because of this delay of 2 days that particular company have been into loss now I can't foresee that there'll be total collapse financially but I can foresee that there might be some problem but totally financial loss foreseeability was not there so here it was held in this case that compensation not given for indirect or unexpected loss raw materials I not only pay for the 2 days delay that is what it is saying you will only pay for the loss you can foresee predict you will pay not for the extremes versus Bley says that silence is not acceptance Here in this case they clearly said that acceptance must be communicated clearly. We also saw in elements of the uh acceptance that when you're making acceptance it should be clear and should be communicated.

[00:25:54]Silence mere silence is not acceptance.

[00:25:59]Merit versus merit. In this case they said that written family agreements can be enforcable if agreement is made between husband and wife who are separated and they have some legal relationship in a sense their intention to get into contract was legal some legal objective to agreement law it is valid. They said if there is any written agreement between family members or even separated spouse, separated spouse and a separated husband and wife then we will treat it as agreement. But any agreement between family members or friends without any legal relationship, legal objective will not be contract.

[00:26:46]Coming to MCQs, A offers to sell his car to B for five lakhs by letter.

[00:26:54]offer by letter. Before B receives the letter, A sells the car to C.

[00:27:03]He have settled it to C. Now, which of the following is correct?

[00:27:09]Contract formed between A and B and no because offer automatically accepted until he have not read the letter. How offer will be accepted? No contract formed because actually I offered Chad Mund C had purchased the car from A. So there will be no contract.

[00:27:37]A reward of 10,000 a reward was of 10,000 was announced for finding a lost dog. be found and returned the dog without knowledge of rec uh what do you say reward later be re uh be claimed reward what will be it as same example what we have took I don't know that there was an offer and now I'm asking for the reward will it be liable I mean will the person is liable to give reward no because when you gave the door you didn't know that there was some offer existing before if you don't know about the offer. You can't even accept the offer or reward.

[00:28:20]A minor falsely represented himself as major and borrowed money from B. Which statement is correct? When a major portrays himself as what? Sorry. If a minor portrays himself as major and gets into a contract, then what? So here it says minor any agreement with minor even though he's falsely saying that I am a major it will be void of any issue we will not treat it as valid still it will be treated as void of show a threat a threatens to file false criminal case against B unless B signs agreement you can see what he's threatening threatening under bioper what it means coercion do you remember so This agreement is is it valid? No, it is voidable due to coercion. Coercion is nothing but forcefully someone asked you to enter into the contract, it is coercion. Voidable means later on after entering entering into the contract, he can think about it whether he want to be in the contract or not. That is voidable.

[00:29:32]A enters agreement with B under mistaken belief that horse is alive but horse had already died. The agreement is void due to mistake of fact. Mistake of fact nuan mistake of law is not excused. You remember right? So here we are saying it is void because actually horse was dead and we didn't know there was a mistake.

[00:29:57]So mistake of fact is valid reason for your what you say now contract will be no longer existing that is void.

[00:30:09]A invites tender for supply of chairs.

[00:30:12]You know right what is tender? Where actually government ask everyone to send their proposals at how lowest they can do a task. That is tender. So A invites tender for supply of chairs. B submits the tender. Invitation to tender is what?

[00:30:30]Now this is the question here. Tenders are always invitation to offer. I'm not giving offer. Government is not giving offer. Government is asking all to give offer. It is inviting to offers. All the people around will send their tender saying I will do this project for 50,000. One will say I will do it for 30,000. So tenders are actually invitation to offer not offer. If you see in shop when there will be uh what you say maniscus you know right where they'll be showcasing the clothes and all that is also offer that is invitation to offer not offer it is invitation to offer a contract induced by fraud is voidable at option of agrieved party agreved party I have the right to decide whether I want to remain in this contract or whether I should revoke this contract.

[00:31:32]A contract a contracts to sell house uh house to be before sale. House destroyed by an earthquake. The contract becames void due to impossibility. It is also known as doctrine of frustration where you can't perform the contract because of impossibility. Impossibility and now not at all you can do it because earthquake was something you can't avoid because of some impossibility you can't do that a signs a contract without reading the terms though capable of understanding it very important you can see without reading the terms though he's fully capable to read and understand later he's claiming that sorry I have ignored I didn't read it then what it is still binding. He can't say that it is voidable or void because you can read the terms and you are I mean you are capable of understanding the terms still you ignored it. So ignorance is not here valid reason. So contract will be binding. Still he should follow the term.

[00:32:46]An agreement without consideration is generally void where we said right no agreement no contract. No agreement no contract.

[00:33:00]Now coming to law of thoughts.

[00:33:05]What is tot as per you? What is tot? It came from a Latin maxim which means tomum.

[00:33:13]In Latin to means tom I mean in Latin tom means something crooked or not straight.

[00:33:29]If something is crooked, not straight or wrong, it means taught. So taught is a civil wrong. It is all it is wrong. It is not crime. It is wrong. For which remedy is given remedies and these remedies are uniquidated. What do you mean by unlquidated reme damages? The remedy is unlquidated damages. Damages means compensation, monetary compensation. You remember it unl unlidated means you have not predetermined it. tell you it is not not predetermined predetermined I know what it is determination predetermination is if if you kill someone you'll go for life imprisonment or death sentence that is predetermined not predetermined and as per your case facts as per your case uh situation we will give the compensation that is unlink liquidated.

[00:34:40]What are important features of your TOR?

[00:34:42]It is a civil wrong.

[00:34:45]It is nothing but a TO is violation of legal right. If someone is violating my right, if someone is violating my legal right, then it will be considered as tot.

[00:34:58]Here remedy is usually compensation.

[00:35:03]No person will be sent to prison. will not impersonate someone. Here usually it is monetary compensation.

[00:35:12]Here the difference between tort and crime is tort is against one particular individual whereas crime is against the society at large. Here in tort what we'll give compensation but in crime we'll be giving punishment. Punishment to the wrongdoer. Here compensation to the victim. victim or the sufferer better word to use is sufferer and here the case will be filed in civil court in crime case will be filed in criminal courts.

[00:35:45]Now coming to the maxims we have read I know but still it is a quick recap or quick revision medium we know right where there is a right there is a remedy if someone violates my right they should I will be eligible to claim for remedy they should give me remedy or what do you say compensation example illegal restriction of property use someone is stopping me from using my property illegally encroachment that person should pay me compensation and leave the particular property. Damn damn which means damage without injury.

[00:36:25]Injury you know right injury is nothing but violation of legal right.

[00:36:35]Violation of legal right is injury.

[00:36:39]Damage means actual loss, harm loss, financial loss is damn without mean uh sign means without. So here we had actual laws or monetary laws without any violation of legal right. It is not a tot. If there is no violation of legal right, it doesn't mean it is a tot. So for example, there is a business loss due to competition, it is not a tot.

[00:37:05]Here you'll not get any remedy for it.

[00:37:08]Important point to remember injurious syndrome means my right is violated but I had no actual loss or actual damage still I'll be getting legal remedy now legal rights violet I it is enough I can claim for the remedy or the money or you can say compensation how many types of thoughts we have you can see negligence defamation nuisance strict liability, absolute liability, wrestligence.

[00:37:48]One key word you should remember is reasonable care where there was my duty to take care and I failed to do so. When there was a duty to take care and that person have not it is nothing but negligence. The essentials of negligence is there is a duty you breached the duty. Breach is nothing but failure to do the thing is breach damage because of this failure.

[00:38:20]Some person have encountered damage opposite person it is negligent. For example, doctor's negligence. Doctor should carefully perform the surgery.

[00:38:36]Right? While performing surgery, he does something negligently wrong. Patient damage, then it is medical negligence.

[00:38:46]What is defamation? Defamation is nothing but false statement made to harm someone's reputation. You know right.

[00:38:56]So here if someone is spreading false rumor about someone that is known as defamation. There are two types of defamation. One is liberal writing.

[00:39:06]Newspaper news articles.

[00:39:09]If you're spreading rumors in writing you wrote a what you say flyer this person is thief that is liel.

[00:39:17]Slander is spoken mart. By your words you are saying something wrong about a person that is slander.

[00:39:27]Nuisance. You use this word very commonly, right? What nuisance it is?

[00:39:32]This means interference.

[00:39:36]Unreasonable interference. You can say unreasonable interference with enjoyment of someone's property. My right is to peacefully enjoy uh my property. In my home in Mauni, if it's past 10 p.m. I can sleep peacefully is my right. But if someone interferes with some loud music is it is nothing but nuisance. There are two types of nuisance. Public nuisance and private nuisance. Public interference noise or else some disturbance many people are getting affected. That is public nuisance where you will be imprisoned. It is treated as crime. Whereas coming to private nuisance mea me neighbor liquid is some one individual one particular individual is getting disturbed that is private nuisance and it is usually taught that is also known as civil wrong.

[00:40:39]Now coming to trace pass if you feel I'm going bit fast you can slow down the speed. So uh coming to trace part, trace part is nothing but when someone wrongfully interfere into my private property, my personal property. This is my private swimming pool. I have a swimming pool in my house and one of the kid from neighborhood without my permission enter into that swimming pool is nothing but trace pass. So here uh you can say trace pass can be of few types that is trace pass to person, trace pass to lands, trace pass to goods. We'll discuss in detail trace pass to person until if you are wrongly interfering with someone's bodily person's bodily liberty or bodily safety. This is my private property. My body is my property. And if you interfere with my property's liberty or safety then it is nothing but trace pass to a person.

[00:41:38]There are types of trace path I mean there are types of trace pass to person.

[00:41:42]One is assault. If someone is scaring me off saying that I'll hit you by say it is assault.

[00:41:51]You can feel the threat you can feel the danger that this person will harm me is assault. Battery means assault that is battery. If I'm saying that I'll hit you, this is assault. If I'm actually hitting you, it is battery.

[00:42:08]Battery is nothing but slightest touch.

[00:42:11]Even it will amount to battery. If someone doesn't want you to touch them and still you touch them for even minor force touches, that is battery.

[00:42:23]False imprisonment.

[00:42:25]Someone is restraining you. room that is false imprisonment. Without any reason, someone is restraining your bodily movement.

[00:42:39]Example for false imprisonment is wrongly locking a person in a room is also false imprisonment.

[00:42:47]In your day-to-day life, you do it usually with your friends, but it is actually a tort. It is a civil offense and they can claim compensation for it.

[00:42:58]Trace pass to land entering into someone's land without permission permission private property personal property enter that is tra to land trace pass to goods my phone that is also what you can say that is trace parts to good example taking or damaging someone's laptop without the authority trace parts to good property without permission move damage trace to property.

[00:43:33]Now coming to the liability principles these are the important ones you should understand much clearly liability. So usually first thoughts if you do the wrong you will be liable. Uh if I slap someone I'll be liable for that I should pay the compensation. But later on it got evolved into no harm principle. Here even though you didn't do wrong you should pay the compensation is known as no harm principle. So here there are three types of liabilities. Strict liability, absolute liability and vicarious liability. Coming to strict liability uh they are like similar but you can identify them by uh remembering the key words. I'll underline the key words. You just see that a person is liable even without negligence if dangerous things escape from his land.

[00:44:29]This point should be remembered. If you bring anything dangerous into your property in your land and it escapes, it goes out of the land then it is strict liability.

[00:44:44]This is said in your real versus Fletcher e case Fletcher bought what he did is he made a water reservoir water store even if you use anything out of a domestic product. I mean if you're using water it is normal normal and good for domestic purpose we will not say it as dangerous thing but if you're using it for some other purpose commercial purpose then it will be treated as dangerous thing. So in this case water reserve water overflow rail coal mine it damaged the coal mines.

[00:45:22]So now coming to essential things here dangerous thing is nothing but something which is used for unnatural purpose.

[00:45:38]You can say even if it is water, if it is water and if it is used for unnatural purpose then it is a dangerous thing. A dangerous thing escape property escape then and because of that escape because of it have escaped damage has been caused to a neighbor or someone nearby then it is known as strict liability. For example, chemical tank leakage is damaging nearby property is example for your strict liability.

[00:46:10]We have few exceptions to strict liability. Number one is plaintiff's own fault. Plaint then it is he can't file case. Then act of god. Act of god is nothing but heavy rains. Sometimes you know in few places there will be no heavy rains.

[00:46:30]In the month of May he then also treated as act of god floods earthquake tsunami everything is treated as act of god then consent of plaintiff then a particular dangerous thing now property I have taken permission from the plaintiff then your plaintiff cannot file complaint act of third party it's not because of me I took all the precautions Ever a bite and the third party have did it because of them this escape have happened then it is act of third party.

[00:47:08]What is absolute liability? A person engaged in hazardous activity is absolute liability. Hazardous Usually it is for your factories, mines and all hazardous dangerous chemicals to they work and all hazardous activity hunter. So the landmark judgment for this uh liability is MC Maha versus Union of India. And important point only differentiation between strict liability and your absolute liability is that in this liability there is no exception four exceptions for absolute liability there is no exception.

[00:47:52]So if you know Bopal case tragedy after that this case have emerged in India.

[00:47:58]This is an Indian provision where our court have made it. It said that we don't uh we strict liability is not enough for us. We want something more strict for this for your factories and industries. So we came with absolute liability. Everishna we are not concerned. If you have took enough care we are not considered. Still if it damages others then you should be liable.

[00:48:27]Now coming to vicarious liability.

[00:48:30]Vicarious liability is revolving around one uh what you say legal maxim that says one person becomes liable for the act of another.

[00:48:42]A does the wrong B is also liable. How it is possible? A is doing wrong. B is liable. Uh driver my personal driver while dropping me I mean he dropped me here and he was going back near the parking space. He have uh hit someone accident might be a kid or something like that. I'll also be liable. He'll also be liable. How? Let's understand. So here common example is in viker is liability employer employee servant master your partners are all connected to each other in a wrong jishna your servant does wrong master will be liable partner done wrong one partner have done wrong all the partners will be liable so we say that a person who doesn't do work directly even in a subordinate he'll be liable because instructions do this do If employer is giving instructions then only the servant will work right then then only the employee will work right. So here we are saying if even servant or employee does the draw master should be liable for it.

[00:49:56]Now coming to vicarious liability of shift. What if your government employee does anything wrong then we uh your government is very intelligent right?

[00:50:07]They came with a thing saying that sovereign functions and non-s sovereign function. What is sovereign function and what is non- sovereign function? Here whenever your government employs performing any sovereign function these these functions then government will not be liable. Sovereign functionant.

[00:50:29]Anything related to defense, anything related to law and order, anything related to administration of justice, your state will not be liable.

[00:50:44]But if the servant if the government servant was doing these non-server sovereign functions then state will be liable. It can be anything for commercial or welfare activities. Then at that time state can be held liable.

[00:50:59]So important rule here is state is liable for negligence only in the sovereign functions until commercial or welfare activities. Example negligence in government hospital or government transport services RTC buses your government related anything where they are not doing the government or your so sovereign functions the government will be liable for it.

[00:51:31]Wait a second.

[00:51:38]So defenses in tort. What are the defenses in tot? First is volunteer non-fit injury. Plaintiff said yes himself. He himself gave the consent.

[00:51:50]Then it is not this particular thing will not be considered as taught. Defense this particular wrong will not be considered as wrong. Defense. So act of God natural disaster it will not be considered as short inevitable accidents unavoidable accidents which which is not in our control which we can't predict is known as inevitable accident situation it will not be considered as taught private defense private defense is what self-defense protection of self or protection of property will not amount to tot necessity it is known as necessity. It was necessary to do. So you have done if you know current what we do we hit them with wooden stick or with a rubber slipper. You can't say that my bodily safety has been traced past because it was to save you from the greater harm. So it will not be amounting to any sort of thought.

[00:53:09]Statuto authority and your government have itself given you the authority to do that particular act then it is known as statuto authority. Just remember these defenses.

[00:53:23]So coming to the important judgments of your tors. First one is donkey versus steepson. It is also famously known as ginger beer case.

[00:53:38]In this case, what happened is two friends uh two ladies get into a restaurant sort of stuff and they order for ginger beer. When they will be drinking, they find a half decomposed snail inside that beer bottle and then they have filed a case where manufacturer says that I am not liable for it. Then in this case they have established neighbor principle neighborhood principle and when you are doing something when you're doing a act you should not be negligence and you should think about the consequences who is neighbor neighbor is the person who will be affected. If dairy milk manufacturer actually be negligent and you find a worm inside it then it is nothing but he should be or she should be known that someone will consume it. Our consumer or customer will consume it and they'll fall ill. So they should be aware about the consequences the neighbor will face.

[00:54:38]So that is neighborhood principle.

[00:54:42]From here your negligence law have actually started from this case. It is this case law is for negligence. Railin versus lechure is for your strict liability. I've explained you already where water escapes from the land to railands coal mines. Then this fletcher was liable of strict liability because he made that water reservoir because of him rails coal mines have been destroyed.

[00:55:11]NCAA versus Union of India. This it is the landmark case for your absolute liability which talks about hazardous industries. Any industry which is dealing with dangerous chemicals, dangerous things should be liable strictly liable even though there is no wrong from their site was been set and it is uh what you say it is after your Bopal case strategy uh sorry tragedy.

[00:55:38]Now comes Ashby versus White.

[00:55:42]If you see Ashby versus White in this case, uh what happens is we your Ashb's legal right was been violated and there was no damage. Ashb was going to cast his vote. Someone have stopped him in between and because of it he couldn't cast his vote and after that he files a case that his fi he files a case that his legal right right to vote have been violated but the person who have stopped him says that he was about to vote this party that is party A and that party have won so there is no damage right why I should give him compensation so court says even though there is no damage no loss still his right to vote was been violated so you should give compensation.

[00:56:31]Kasuri Lal versus state of UP is the landmark judgment for your vicarious liability of state where it clearly said that when police have lost seized gold seize police one of the duty is to seize search right search and seize when it was doing his sovereign duty police duty of seize and searchers nothing but a sovereign duty was been said in Kasurilal and they said is state is not liable for it because it was a sovereign function.

[00:57:10]So in this case nagendra ra versus state of AP your court said that state cannot claim immunity for every government activity and it now clearly this landmark judgment is being used in our modern era for everything your state cannot take immunity is what this case is saying coming to the MCQs first MCQ things speaks for itself means nothing But your res eps locker it is uh important for your negligence.

[00:57:50]A spectator injured during the cricket match cannot sue because cricket match this is uh very important three stars I can say when you will be going to a cricket match or any race you know chances that we'll get injured it is risky because six in the recent match it happened if you if you're watching IPL you know that so here we are saying volunte non-fit injury are you voluntarily got into this cricket match injury you can't claim compensation. They are saying state liability mainly depends on on whom the state liability mean state liability depends on sovereign and non- sovereign your liability in a sense your state is liable or not whether it is a sovereign function or non- sovereign function we'll check right this is the main uh what you say the thing the rule first we should check it is sovereign activity or non- sovereign activity it is non non-s sovereign activity state is liable if it is sovereign activity state is not liable sovereign sovereign immunity discussed in which case in your kasuri case we have seen right police officer seized the gold in gold in constable Pakistan so in that case they said that no your sovereign immunity is there and if state is exercising it sovereign anti- sovereign function stays it will not be held liable.

[00:59:31]A municipal authority lawfully constructs a drainage system. During unpre uh unpredicted floods, nearby houses are damaged. Which defense is most likely available? If you see this is nothing but what floods is act of god and act of god are usually the natural calamities a publishes true allegations against corrupt public officer true in your uh what do you say in your defamation murana if we talk true things if if the statement is true it will not be amount amounting to defamation. So after proper investigation in an action for defamation, A is most likely to succeed on the defense of truth. Untape.

[01:00:27]What is the defense of defamation? If you criticize someone, if you usually uh say truth, then it will not be amounting to defamation. So here the defense is if he's saying truth, it is not defamation.

[01:00:43]A chemical factory stores hazardous gas.

[01:00:47]Despite all precautions, leakage occurs causing public injury.

[01:00:55]All precautions leakage public injury. Which means which principle applies? Absolute liability where there is no defense available.

[01:01:07]Which of the following correctly distinguishes strict liability from absolute liability?

[01:01:13]Strict liability exceptions defenses.

[01:01:16]Absolute liability.

[01:01:18]Strict liability has exceptions, defenses. Absolute liability does not.