Bissoy.com
Doctors Medicines MCQs Q&A

Related Questions

Under section 64 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882 when a Licensee is evicted by the grantor of property without any fault of his own then
Which section of The Indian Easements Act 1882 deals with Continuous and discontinuous, apparent and non-apparent, easements?
Carefully read following statements:
1. According to Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, requirement is of two persons, whereas under Section 149 of Indian Penal Code, requirement is of five persons.
2. According to Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, common intention is required whereas under Section 149 Indian Penal Code, common object is required
3. Previous consent is required under Section 34 & 149 of Indian Penal Code
4. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 149 of Indian Penal Code constitutes a specific offence
Which of the above statements is true:
Consider the following statements:
1. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code requires two persons whereas Section 149 of Indian Penal Code require five persons.
2. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code requires common intention, whereas Section 149 of Indian Penal Code requires common object
3. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 149 of Indian Penal Code both require presence of a prior consent
4. Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and section 149 of Indian Penal Code. Both create specific offence
Which of the above statements are correct?
A group of 74 students of Class XI went on picnic. The number of students who went on picnic by each section is as follows: Section A = 15 Section B = 24 Section C = 15 Section D = 20 5 students from Section A spent as much as 4 students from Section B. 12 Section B students spent as much as 9 Section C students and 6 Section C students spent as much as 8 Section D student. If every student of a particular section spent the same amount and all the students spent Rs. 23,370 altogether, find the amount spent by each student of Section D?
If a + b + c + d = 4, then find the value of $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - a} \right)\left( {1 - b} \right)\left( {1 - c} \right)}}$$     + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - b} \right)\left( {1 - c} \right)\left( {1 - d} \right)}}$$     + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - c} \right)\left( {1 - d} \right)\left( {1 - a} \right)}}$$     + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - d} \right)\left( {1 - a} \right)\left( {1 - b} \right)}}$$     is?
If a + b + c + d = 4, then the value of $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - a} \right)\left( {1 - b} \right)\left( {1 - c} \right)}}$$     + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - b} \right)\left( {1 - c} \right)\left( {1 - d} \right)}}$$     + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - c} \right)\left( {1 - d} \right)\left( {1 - a} \right)}}$$     + $$\frac{1}{{\left( {1 - d} \right)\left( {1 - a} \right)\left( {1 - b} \right)}}$$     is?
PRINCIPLES: 1. Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defense.
2. When an act, which would otherwise be a certain offence, is not that offence, by reason of the youth, the want of maturity of understanding, the unsoundness of mind or the intoxication of that person or by reason of misconception on the part of that person, every person has the same right of private defense against that act, which he would have if that act were an offence.
3. Everyone has the right to defend their life and property against criminal harm provided it is not possible to approach public authorities and more harm than that is necessary has not been caused to avert the danger.
4. If in the exercise of right of private defense against an assault which reasonably causes the apprehension of death, the defender be so situated that he cannot effectually exercise that right without risk of harm to an innocent person, his right of private defense extends to the running of that risk.
5. The right of private defense continues as long as apprehension of danger continues.
FACT: A enters by night a house which he is legally entitled to enter. Z, in good faith, taking A for a housebreaker, attacks A.
Which of the following instances of order are decrees?
1. An order rejecting an application for leave to sue in forma pauperis for no suit has till then been filed
2. An order refusing leave to institute for accounts of religious endowment
3. An order under the Indian Trusts Act, 1882 dismissing an application for the removal of trustee
4. An order on a settlement case under section 104 (2) of the Bengal Tenancy Act 3 of 1898 as the proceeding is instituted not by a plaint but by an application
5. An order made on an application to the District Court under section 84 (2) of the Madras Religious Endowments Act 2 of 1927
Last year, there were three sections in a competitive exam. Out of them 33 students cleared the cut-off in Section A, 34 students cleared the cut-off in Section B and 32 students cleared the cut-off in Section C. 10 students cleared the cut-off in section A and section B, 9 cleared the cut-off in section B and section C and 8 cleared the cut-off in section A and section C. The number of students who cleared only one section was equal and was 21 for each section. How many students cleared all the three sections?