A suit for compensation for malicious prosecution shall be filed within . . . . . . . . from the time when the plaintiff is acquitted or prosecution is otherwise terminated.

Suit for compensation for malicious prosecution is to be filed from the date when the plaintiff is acquitted or the prosecution is otherwise terminated within

A

Three years

B

Two years

C

One year

D

Twelve years

In a suit filed by the plaintiff, the defendant in his written statement has taken the objection of non-impleadment of necessary party. Despite such objection the plaintiff continued the suit and the suit finally was decreed. At the first appellate stage, the plaintiff withdraws the suit with liberty to file a fresh one on the same cause of action and subsequently filed a fresh suit. The period spent by the plaintiff in the earlier suit, under section 14 of Limitation Act is

A

Liable to be excluded on the ground that the plaintiff was prosecuting the earlier suit with due diligence and in good faith

B

Not liable to be excluded as the plaintiff cannot be said to be prosecuting the earlier suit with due diligence and in good faith

C

Liable to be excluded under section 14(3) of Limitation Act

D

To be excluded or not to be excluded is in the discretion of the court

A theft had been committed in the defendant's house. He informed the police that he suspected the plaintiff for the same. Therefore the plaintiff was arrested by the police. A complaint was filed by the defendant but the plaintiff was subsequently discharged by the magistrate as the final report showed that there was no evidence connecting the plaintiff with the theft. The plaintiff filed a suit for damages on the ground of malicious prosecution.
In the above case, which one of the following decisions is correct?

A

The plaintiff is entitled to claim damages from the defendant

B

The plaintiff is entitled to claim damages from the police

C

The plaintiff is entitled to claim damages from both

D

The plaintiff is not entitled to claim damages for malicious prosecution at all

Which of the following statements is/are correct in connection with malicious prosecution?
1. Malice is to be inferred from the acquittal of the plaintiff.
2. Malice is not to be inferred from the acquittal of the plaintiff.
3. The plaintiff must prove independently of the acquittal that his prosecution was without reasonable and probable cause,
4. The plaintiff is not required to prove that his prosecution was without reasonable and probable cause.
Select the correct answer using the given below:

A

3 only

B

2 and 3

C

2 and 4

D

1 and 4

To constitute a matter of res judicata which of the following conditions must concur?
1. The matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit or issue must be the same matter which was directly and substantially in issue either actually (section 11, explanation III) or constructively (section 11, explanation IV) in the former suit
2. The former suit must have been a suit between the same parties under whom they or any of them claim. Explanation VI of Section 11 must be read with this condition
3. The parties as aforesaid must have litigated under the same title in the former suit
4. The court which decided the former suit must have been a court competent to try the subsequent suit of the suit in which such issue has been subsequently raised. Explanation II of section 11 is to be read with condition
5. The matter directly and substantially in issue in the subsequent suit must have been heard and finally decided by the court in the first suit. Explanation V of section 11 is to be read with this condition

A

1, 2

B

3, 4

C

2, 4, 5

D

All of these

The defendant had filed a complaint to the Magistrate against the plaintiff. The complaint was dismissed. The defendant moved the Sessions Judge in appeal. He got himself examined in Sessions trial although he knew the charge was false and he was acting without reasonable and probable cause. His complaint was dismissed by the Session Judge. Thereupon the plaintiff filed a suit for malicious prosecution against the defendant.
In the aforesaid case, which one of the following conclusion in correct?

A

The defendant is liable for malicious prosecution

B

The defendant is not liable for malicious prosecution

C

The defendant is not liable to pay damages to the plaintiff

D

The plaintiff suit must be dismissed

The plaintiff, a bullion merchant; was arrested by the police on a charge of purchasing stolen goods. Gold and silver ornaments were seized from the plaintiff and were kept in the police station custody. The duty constable appropriated the gold ornaments and escaped to a foreign country. The plaintiff after being acquitted, brought an action against the State for compensation. In this case compensation is:

A

Payable as there is misappropriation by servants of the State

B

Payable due to the fact that the police constable escaped to foreign country

C

Payable by the police constable himself and not by the state

D

Not payable as the act was committed in discharge of sovereign function

Which of the following requirements form an essential element of the tort of malicious prosecution?
1. Prosecution of the plaintiff by the defendant
2. Termination of the case in favour of the defendant
3. Termination of the case in favour of the plaintiff
4. Presence of reasonable and probable cause
5. Absence of reasonable and probable cause
6. Malice on the part of the defendant
7. Damage suffered by the plaintiff
Select the correct answer using the given below:

A

1, 3, 5, 6 and 7

B

1, 2, 4, 6 and 7

C

1, 3, 4, 6 and 7

D

1, 2, 5, 6 and 7

In a suit for partition, a Memorandum of Family Settlement is filed and on this basis the partition suit is decreed, but even after disposal of the suit the original Memorandum of Family Settlement remains in the file of the partition suit, then in such situation whether in a suit for eviction by one of the original co-owner of a tenant of a shop of the joint property which has fallen to the share of that co-owner as per the decree passed on the Memorandum of Family Settlement, can the certified copy of the Memorandum of Family Settlement be filed and proved as a public document in the suit against the tenant?

A

No, it cannot be because the original Memorandum of Family Settlement document which exists in the suit for partition which is disposed of, is a private document and not public document under Section 74 of the Evidence Act

B

Yes, if a certified copy is obtained of the Memorandum of Family Settlement, and filed in the suit against the tenant, as the certified copy being issued by a court, is a public document

C

Yes, certified copy obtained from a court of the Memorandum of Family Settlement will be a public document provided that the suit was filed and disposed of by a High Court and not the District Court

D

Yes provided the certified copy of the Memorandum of Family Settlement is sought to be proved by the executants of the memorandum of settlement

C, a stranger blocked the water pipes of a wash-basin and opened the tap. The wash-basin was otherwise in the control of the defendant B. The overflowing water damaged the plaintiff goods. Thereupon the plaintiff filed a suit for damages against the defendant B. C was not made a party.
In the aforesaid suit which one of the following conclusions is correct?

A

The defendant was liable for damages to the plaintiff to the basis of rule of strict liability

B

The defendant was not liable for damages

C

The stranger C will have to pay damages

D

The plaintiffs suit will be decreed in his favour

A suit for compensation for malicious prosecution shall be filed within . . . . . . . . from the time when the plaintiff is acquitted or prosecution is otherwise terminated.

Related Questions