Match the LIST-I with LIST-II
List – I Case Law List – II Concept A Ashby v/s White II Violation of absolute right B Rylands v/s Fletcher III Strict liability C Olga Tellis v/s Bombay Municipal Corp. I Poverty as an involuntary act under Tort D Allen v/s Flood IV Motive is irrelevant in Tort
Choose the correct answer from the options given below:
This question requires matching specific legal case laws from List-I with the legal concepts they represent in List-II.
| List-I Case Law | List-II Concept |
|---|---|
| A. Ashby v/s White | II. Violation of absolute right |
| B. Rylands v/s Fletcher | III. Strict liability |
| C. Olga Tellis v/s Bombay Municipal Corp. | I. Poverty as an involuntary act under Tort |
| D. Allen v/s Flood | IV. Motive is irrelevant in Tort |
The correct matching, derived from the analysis, is A-II, B-III, C-I, and D-IV.
| LIST-I | LIST-II | ||
| A. | Hedonism | II. | In Pursuit of Pleasure |
| B. | Hidden Crime | I. | Crimes not Recorded in Official Crime Data |
| C. | Incapacitation | IV. | Removal of Offenders' Ability to Commit Crime |
| D. | Incarceration | III. | The Process of Confining or Segregating Offending Populations |
| LIST-I (Theory) | LIST-II (Propounder) |
| A. Pigeon Hole Theory | I. William Prosser |
| B. Neighbour Rule | II. Wenfield |
| C. Tort is Social Engineering | III. Lord Atkin |
| D. Use of phrase 'Law of Tort' | IV. Salmond |