FACTS: M.G. Ltd, was constructing Crystal Heights, a posh state-of-the-art tower for commercial and residential purposes, in Gurugram. During construction, hundreds of claimants alleged that, in addition to dust and noise caused by the erection of the building, their television signals had been interrupted by the tower. The claimants, some of whom were absolute owners, and many others who were renting, sued in both negligence and in nuisance for the harm done to their amenity by the loss of their television signals. Whether the respondent’s action in causing the appellant’s television signals to be interrupted with the construction of their tower could constitute a private nuisance?
(a) The interference with the television signal caused by the construction of the tower could not amount to a private nuisance at law. Effective town planning can sort this matter, instead.
(b) Yes, the large tower had interrupted their television reception, and caused private nuisance – for loss of enjoyment – and remuneration for their wasted television license fee, from the time their signal had been impaired.
(c) No, it cannot constitute private nuisance but the claimants can claim damages for loss of television signals.
(d) Yes, the respondent’s conduct was unreasonable because the act of building the tower caused impairment of enjoyment of the land.
The answers are: 1. (a); 2. (b).
Directions (Qs. 1-3): Select the related letters/word/number/figures from the given alternatives.
1. ATOM : ZGLN : : NUCLEAR : ?
2. House : Rent : : Capital : ?
3. AUTOMOBILE : FMJCPNPUVB :: SENTENCE : ?
4. City X is in the West of city Y, while city ‘Z’ is in the north of city ‘Y’ and city W is in the South-East of ‘Z’, then what is the direction of city ‘W’ with respect to ‘X’?
(d) Cannot say.
5. Five faces of a cube are painted red and remaining face is left unpainted. Now this cube is cut into 64 equal size smaller cubes. Then how many cubes are there which are colourless?
The answers are: 1. (c); 2. (a); 3. (a); 4. (d); 5. (c).
Directions (Qs. 1-4): In each question below is a statement followed by two arguments numbered I and II. You have to decide which of the arguments is a ‘strong’ argument and which, is a ‘weak’ argument. Give answer
(a) if only argument I is strong
(b) if only argument II is strong.
(c) if neither I nor II strong.
(d) if both I and II are strong.
1. Statement: Should all those who have come in contact with the patients suffering from the dreaded infectious respiratory disease be quarantined in their house?
I. No, nobody should be quarantined unless they are tested and found to be infected by the virus causing the disease.
II. Yes, this is the only way to control the spread of the dreaded disease.
2. Statement: Should there be only one rate of interest for term deposits of varying durations in banks?
I. No, people will refrain from keeping money for longer duration resulting into reduction of liquidity level of banks.
II. Yes, this will be much simple for the common people and they may be encouraged to keep more money in banks.
3. Statement: Should there be a cap on maximum number of contestants for parliamentary elections in any constituency?
I. Yes, this will make the parliamentary elections more meaningful as the voters can make a considered judgment for casting their vote.
II. No, in a democracy any person fulfilling the eligibility criteria can contest parliamentary elections and there should be no such restrictions.
4. Statement: Should all those who are found guilty of committing homicide or abetting homicide be either given capital punishment or be kept in jail for the entire life?
I. Yes, such severe punishments only will make people refrain from committing such heinous acts and the society will be safer.
II. No, those who are repentant for the crime they committed be given a chance to lead a normal life outside the jail.
The answers are: 1. (a); 2. (a); 3. (d); 4. (a).