The liability to pay compensation, of an enterprise carrying on an inherently dangerous and hazardous activity, on death of a worker due to leakage of lethal gas is based on the principle of:

The liability to pay compensation, of an enterprise carrying on an inherently dangerous and hazardous activity, on death of a worker due to leakage of lethal gas is based on the principle of: Correct Answer Absolute liability

Bissoy MCQ

Related Questions

Principle: An enterprise which is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity which poses a potential threat to the health and safety of the persons working in the factory and residing in the surrounding area owes an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community to ensure that no harm results to anyone on account of his activity.
Facts: A poisonous gas leaked from the storage tank of fertilizers manufacturing industry of defendant due to a wind storm resulting in serious breathing problems and eye injuries to 'A' and 'B' who were working in the factory and 'C' and 'D' who were residing in the surrounding area.
Which of the following statements is/are correct with regard to 'absolute liability' principle laid down in M. C. Mehta v. Union of India. Answer by using the below:
(1) The principle was approved except as to quantum of damages in Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India
(2) The principle in determining compensation was applied in Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India
(3) The compensation to be awarded must have some broad correlation not only with magnitude and capacity of the enterprise but also with the harm caused by it was held in Deepak Nitrite v. State of Gujarat
(4) The principle is not followed in India because Parliament could not yet pass Public Liability Insurance Bill, 1991
While dealing with the liability of an enterprise engaged in inherently dangerous activity, the Supreme Court laid down the rule of 'absolute liability' in-
In which one of the following cases has the Supreme Court laid down that where the enterprise is engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities and harm results to anyone on account of accident, the enterprise is strictly liable to compensate all those who are affected by such accident?
The Supreme Court laid down in . . . . . . . . that where the enterprise is engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities and harm result to anyone on account of accident, the enterprise is strictly liable to compensate all those who are affected by such accident?
Propositions as regards the liability of the surety under the surety bond are:
1. The liability of the surety is mutually exclusive of the liability of the accused under his personal bond.
2. The liability of the surety is contingent on the liability of the accused under his personal bond the liability of the surety.
3. is limited to the amount of the surety bond.
Now which of the following is correct
In each of the following question below are given some statements followed by some conclusions. Taking the given statements to be true even if they seem to be at variance from commonly known facts, read all the conclusions and then decide which of the given conclusion logically follows the given statements. Statements: I. All insects are dangerous. II. All machines are dangerous. Conclusions: I. All dangerous are insects. II. All dangerous are machines. III. Some machines are insects.
Principle: A person who voluntarily takes a decision to do something after appreciating the risk involved in such act and then receives an injury, will not be entitled to get any compensation.
Facts: 'X', an electrical engineer, was invited by his friend 'Y', to the factory where he was employed. While they were in the factory, 'Q' a worker in the factory informed 'Y' about some short-circuit in the power room. Hearing this, 'Y' asked 'X' to stay in the office room and rushed to the power room. 'X' however, decided to follow 'Y'. 'X' noticed that if the power supply through a particular electric line could be disconnected, the electrical leakage could be stopped which would prevent further damage. Suddenly 'X' decided to pullout the wire manually even though it was risky. This resulted in a blast in which both 'X' and 'Y' got injured. 'X' had to spend Rs. 1 lakh at the hospital for his treatment. 'X' wants to file a suit for compensation from the management of the factory. Will he succeed?
Where the death of, or bodily injury to, any person gives rise to a claim for compensation under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and also under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, the person entitled to compensation may claim such compensation
Which of the following statements are true/false?
1. Every worker who has worked fora period of 240 days or more in a factory during a calendar year shall be allowed during the subsequent calendar year, leave with wages.
2. A worker who has been allowed leave for not less than four days, in the case of an adult, and five days, in the case of a child shall, before his leave begins, be paid the wages due for the period of the leave allowed.
3. If a worker works in a factory works for more than nine hours in any day or for more than 40 hours in any week, he shall, in respect of overtime work, be entitled to wagesat the rate oftwicehis ordinary rate of wages.4. The periods of work of an adult worker in a factory shall be so arranged that inclusive of his intervals for rest, they shall not spread over more than eleven and a half hours in any day.