UGC NET Law Unit 5: Torts & Consumer Protection Notes and MCQs
Unit 5 mixes common law torts with three statutes: the Consumer Protection Act, the Motor Vehicles Act and the Competition Act. Questions usually ask for the case behind a doctrine, the test for liability, or what changed under the 2019 consumer law. These notes follow the ten syllabus topics and give you the cases and sample questions to start with.
Negligence
Strict and absolute liability
State liability
Consumer Protection Act 2019
Competition Act
10 syllabus topics
250+ free MCQs
No sign-up
Updated 11 October 2026
NET Law 058 is an independent study aid, not affiliated with UGC or NTA. Always check the official UGC NET syllabus and the current bare Acts.
What Unit 5 covers
Torts is case-driven, so revise principle and case together, and read the 2019 consumer law as the main text. The official syllabus lists 10 topics for this unit. Each is explained below with the points examiners most often use.
1Nature and definition of tort
A tort is a civil wrong, remedied mainly by an action for unliquidated damages. Winfield: liability arising from breach of a duty primarily fixed by law, owed to persons generally and redressible by damages.
Tort differs from crime (a wrong against the State, punished) and from breach of contract (duty fixed by the parties, not by law).
Functions of tort law: compensation, deterrence and vindication of rights. Maxim: ubi jus ibi remedium.
Indian tort law is mostly uncodified common law, applied through justice, equity and good conscience and adapted by Indian courts.
2General principles of tortious liability
Three elements: a wrongful act or omission, a legal duty and legal damage (injuria) that the law recognises.
Damnum sine injuria: harm without violation of a legal right is not actionable (Gloucester Grammar School; Mogul Steamship). Injuria sine damno: violation of a legal right is actionable without proof of loss (Ashby v. White).
Mental element: intention, negligence and malice. Motive is usually irrelevant (Bradford Corporation v. Pickles), but matters in torts such as malicious prosecution.
Vicarious liability: master for servant in the course of employment (respondeat superior), principal for agent, and partners for each other.
3General defences
Volenti non fit injuria: free and informed consent to the risk. It does not defeat a rescuer's claim.
Necessity, private defence, inevitable accident, act of God, statutory authority and plaintiff's own default.
Contributory negligence reduces damages in proportion to the claimant's share of fault. It is not a complete defence.
Mistake and Act of God are narrow defences. Statutory authority protects only what the statute authorises, done without negligence.
4Specific torts: negligence, nuisance, trespass and defamation
Negligence: duty of care, breach and damage caused by the breach. Neighbour principle from Donoghue v. Stevenson (1932). Res ipsa loquitur lets negligence be inferred from the occurrence.
Professional negligence: Bolam test for the standard of care. Criminal medical negligence needs gross negligence (Jacob Mathew, 2005).
Nuisance: unlawful interference with use and enjoyment of land (private) or with the public at large (public). Trespass is direct interference, for example entry on land, assault, battery and false imprisonment.
Defamation: publication of a false statement that lowers a person's reputation. Libel is in permanent form and slander is transient. Defences: truth, fair comment, privilege. Criminal defamation was upheld in Subramanian Swamy (2016).
5Remoteness of damages
Re Polemis (1921) used the directness test: all direct consequences are recoverable.
The Wagon Mound (No. 1) (1961) replaced it with reasonable foreseeability of the kind of damage.
Eggshell skull rule: the defendant takes the victim as found, so the extent of the injury need not be foreseeable.
In contract, the remoteness rule is Hadley v. Baxendale (1854), reflected in Section 73 of the Indian Contract Act.
6Strict and absolute liability
Rylands v. Fletcher (1868): liability without fault for escape of a dangerous thing from land put to non-natural use. Exceptions include plaintiff's consent, act of God, act of a stranger and statutory authority.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987), the Oleum gas leak case: absolute liability for hazardous or inherently dangerous industries, with no exceptions and damages linked to the enterprise's capacity to pay.
Statutory no-fault regimes: Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 and Section 17 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010.
Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985 gave the Union the right to represent the victims.
7Tortious liability of the State
Article 300 makes the Union and States suable, with liability as the Dominion and the Provinces had before the Constitution.
P. and O. Steam Navigation Co. (1861) drew the line between sovereign and non-sovereign functions. State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati (1962) held the State vicariously liable for a government driver's negligence. Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain (1965) upheld immunity for a sovereign function.
Public law compensation under Articles 32 and 226 for violation of fundamental rights: Rudul Sah (1983), Bhim Singh (1985), Nilabati Behera (1993). Sovereign immunity is no answer here.
Courts now read the sovereign function category narrowly, and the Law Commission has recommended statutory reform.
8Consumer Protection Act, 1986: definitions, consumer rights and redressal mechanism (study alongside the current 2019 Act and amendments)
The 1986 Act was replaced by the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, in force from 20 July 2020. It covers goods, services, e-commerce, teleshopping and direct selling. Section 2(7) defines a consumer and excludes resale or commercial purpose.
Section 2(9) lists consumer rights: safety, information, choice, to be heard, redressal and consumer awareness.
Three-tier redressal: District, State and National Commission. Pecuniary limits under the 2021 Rules are based on the consideration paid: up to Rs 50 lakh, up to Rs 2 crore, and above Rs 2 crore. Limitation is two years.
New features of 2019: Central Consumer Protection Authority (class action, recalls, penalties for misleading advertisements), product liability, unfair contracts, mediation cells and e-filing. Medical services are covered (Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha, 1995).
Fixed no-fault compensation is payable for death and grievous hurt irrespective of any wrongful act (Section 140 of the 1988 Act). The 2019 Amendment revised the amounts and some section numbers, so check the current text before you memorise figures.
Compulsory third-party insurance (Section 146 and the Chapter XI scheme) protects victims against the owner's default.
Motor Accident Claims Tribunals hear claims. A claim under Section 166 has no cap and is based on fault; the multiplier method is in Sarla Verma v. DTC (2009), refined in National Insurance Co. v. Pranay Sethi (2017).
Hit and run victims are compensated from a solatium or Motor Vehicle Accident Fund.
10Competition Act, 2002: prohibited agreements, abuse of dominance and regulation of combinations
The Act replaced the MRTP Act, 1969 and set up the Competition Commission of India (CCI). Appeals lie to the NCLAT, which replaced COMPAT in 2017.
Section 3: anti-competitive agreements. Horizontal agreements such as cartels and bid rigging are presumed to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition. Vertical agreements are judged on a rule of reason.
Section 4: abuse of dominant position, for example unfair or discriminatory prices, limiting production and denying market access. Dominance itself is not an offence.
Sections 5 and 6: combinations (mergers and acquisitions above prescribed thresholds) need CCI approval. The Competition (Amendment) Act, 2023 added a deal value threshold, settlement and commitment procedures, and penalties on global turnover.
Quick reference tables
Tort, crime and breach of contract
Point
Tort
Crime
Breach of contract
Duty fixed by
Law
Law
The parties
Wrong against
An individual
Society and the State
The other party
Remedy
Unliquidated damages, injunction
Punishment
Damages (often liquidated) or specific performance
Proceedings
Civil, by the injured person
Criminal, by the State
Civil, by the injured party
Standard of proof
Balance of probabilities
Beyond reasonable doubt
Balance of probabilities
Strict and absolute liability
Point
Rylands v. Fletcher
M.C. Mehta
Origin
England, 1868
India, 1987
Applies to
Non-natural use of land
Hazardous or inherently dangerous industry
Exceptions
Consent, act of God, stranger, statutory authority
None
Escape needed
Yes
No, harm in the course of the activity is enough
Damages
Compensatory
Exemplary, linked to the enterprise's size and capacity
Landmark cases to revise
Donoghue v. Stevenson1932
Neighbour principle: a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer.
Rylands v. Fletcher1868
Strict liability for escape of a dangerous thing from non-natural use of land.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum gas leak)1987
Absolute liability for hazardous industries, with no exceptions.
The Wagon Mound (No. 1)1961
Damage must be reasonably foreseeable to be recoverable; the directness test was rejected.
Bolam v. Friern Hospital Management Committee1957
A professional is not negligent if he acts as a responsible body of his peers would.
State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati1962
State vicariously liable for a government driver's negligence in a non-sovereign function.
Kasturilal Ralia Ram Jain v. State of U.P.1965
State not liable for tort committed by police in the exercise of sovereign power.
Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar1983
Compensation can be awarded under Article 32 for unlawful detention.
Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa1993
State must pay public law compensation for a custodial death.
Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha1995
Medical services for a fee fall within the meaning of service under consumer law.
Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab2005
Criminal liability for medical negligence requires gross negligence.
Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India2016
Criminal defamation provisions upheld as a reasonable restriction on speech.
Practise Torts & Consumer Protection MCQs topic by topic
Beyond the six samples, all 290 questions for this unit are on their own pages, grouped by syllabus topic, with the answer key on the page.
5Match: A Volenti, B Necessity, C Statutory authority, D Inevitable accident with (1) Authorised by Act (2) Consent (3) Avoid greater harm (4) Unavoidable despite care