Our
class teacher Smt. Premsy, teacher of Constitutional Law – 1 (CP-03)
came to the class in the first period and taught the following among others.
1.
Constitution is divided into different parts
which are subdivided into chapters and each provision therein is called an
article.
2.
The main contents of the Constitution of India
such as parliamentary form of India, law of single citizenship, idea of rule of
law, institution of speaker and his role, law making procedure are borrowed
from British Constitution.
3.
Charter of fundamental rights, federal structure
of the Government, power of judicial review, and independence of Judiciary are
borrowed from American Constitution.
4.
Directive principles of state policy are
borrowed from Irish Constitution.
5.
The idea of liberty equality and fraternity is
borrowed from the French Constitution.
6.
The quasi federal nature of our constitution
with a strong Union Government to regulate or control States and the idea of
residual powers are borrowed from Canadian Constitution.
7.
The idea of concurrent list, freedom of trade
and commerce within the country and between the States are borrowed from the
Australian Constitution.
8.
The idea of Planning Commission and the five
year plans and the idea of fundamental duties are borrowed from the Soviet
Union.
9.
The Classification of Rights into Civil,
Political, Economic and Social Rights is taken from the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. However this declaration was only for awareness purpose. It
was not mandatory for the member countries of UN to follow this declaration.
10.
International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR) define the Civil and Political Rights.
11.
International Covenant on Social and Cultural
Rights (ICSCR) define the Civil and Political Rights.
12.
Some of the above rights are incorporated into
the directive principles of State Policy.
13.
Some rights in the directive principles of State
policy were later incorporated into the fundamental rights too.
14.
India is a democratic polity with a rule of law.
15.
The idea of rule of law limits the power of the
Government. Absence of corruption, open governance and fundamental rights are
characteristics of rule of law.
The hour ended there. Then an ABVP campaign came into the
class to commemorate the martyrdom of Sri. Sandeep Unnikrishnan who died in the
Mumbai Blast operation. They also wanted to convene a protest in front of the
office of the Principal Smt. Binu Poornamodan Cholayil against her refusal to
allow the function on the ground that flower, offering flowers and lighting
lamps are religious and hence not allowed inside the campus. ABVP plans to make
a moke pooja before her office.
Smt. Premalatha, teacher of Law of
Torts (CP-03) came
to the class in the second hour and taught the following points.
1.
Smt.
Premalatha informed that 30.11.2015 Monday shall be a holiday. There will be a
quiz competition on 01.12.2015 on Indian Constitution.
2.
There
are two kinds of liabilities namely, tortiuous liability and vicarious
liability.
3.
If
A wrongs B and B approaches the Court against A then the liability of A towards
B is tortiuous liability.
4.
In
vicarious liability the wrong doer and his principal shall share the liability
if the injured wishes to sue them.
5.
If
A is the master , B is the servant and C the injured and C sues his B and B
pays compensation to C, then B can sue A for the compensation amount paid.
6.
Generally
a person is liable for his own wrongful act. But in certain circumstances,
another person may become liable for the wrong committed somebody by way of a
particular relationship between the wrongdoer and the person made liable.
7.
Such
vicarious liability is possible in the following relationships
1.
Master
servant relationship
2.
Principal
agent relationship
3.
Partners
in a partnership firm
8.
LEGAL
MAXIM : Qui facit per alium, facit per se = whoever acts through another acts
himself.
An act
committed by the agent is considered as the act by the principal himself.
According to
this principle an injured person can sue a master for a wrong committed by his
servant. So the principal is liable for all wrongs committed by his servant.
Thus the Principlal is liable for all wrongs committed by his agent.
9.
If
the act is not an authorised one, or not in course of the business, the master
is not liable for the wrong doing of his servant.
10.
CASE
LAW : Lloyd v. Grace, Smith & Co.
This case law
is already mentioned in the daily report of 24.11.2015. The Court observed in
this case that being the master, the firm is liable to compensate the loss
caused by its employee.
11.
CASE
LAW : State Bamk of India v. Shyamadevi.
This case law
is already mentioned in the daily report of 24.11.2015.. The court observed in
this case that the Bank was not liable as the transaction in question was not
taken place at the bank premises.
12.
As
Smt. Premalatha started explaining the Legal Maxim Respondeat Superior = Let
the superior answer = Let the master be responsible the hour ended.
Then a
political campaign lead by SFI came into the classroom. The averments of SFI
were
1.
Even
Indian President has stated that tolerance in India is challenged.
2.
It
is the duty of SFI to protest when RSS and Sangh Parivar breach the tolerance.
3.
The
Protest of ABVP against the Principal was not right.
There was no
class in the third, fourth and fifth hour as the rooms had to be cleaned for
National Moot Court competitions. Students were asked to clean their respective
class rooms.
