Question:

Directions: The question consists of two statements, one labelled as 'Assertion' (A) and the other as 'Reason' (R). Examine these two statements carefully and select the correct answer.

Assertion (A): In the event of violation of any legal right (tort) the aggrieved party is entitled to recover unliquidated damages.

Reason (R): The object of awarding damages to the aggrieved party is to put him in the same position in which he would have been if the wrong would not have been committed. Damages are therefore, assessed on that basis.

Show Hint

Work out what "unliquidated" means: a sum nobody fixed in advance, so the court must assess it. Then ask whether the compensatory aim in R is what forces that assessment.
Updated On: Jul 17, 2026
  • Both A and R are individually true and R is the correct explanation of A.
  • Both A and R are individually true but R is not the correct explanation of A.
  • A is true but R is false.
  • A is false but R is true.
Show Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is A

Solution and Explanation

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
Statement A says the remedy for a tort is unliquidated damages. Statement R states the aim of awarding damages and adds that damages are assessed on that basis.
The key word is "unliquidated", so start by fixing its meaning.

Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
Liquidated damages are a sum the parties fixed in advance, which only happens where there is a contract between them.
Unliquidated damages are not fixed in advance by anyone. The court works out the figure after the wrong, looking at what the claimant actually lost.

Step 3: Testing statement A:
A tort is a civil wrong, and its usual remedy is an action for unliquidated damages. That phrase appears in the standard definition of tort itself.
The reason is simple. A tortfeasor and a victim are usually strangers. A pedestrian knocked down by a careless driver never sat with the driver beforehand to agree a price for the injury. Nobody could have fixed a sum in advance, so the court must fix it afterwards. A is true.

Step 4: Testing statement R:
R states the principle of restitutio in integrum, that damages should put the injured party back in the position he would have occupied had the wrong not happened. This is the accepted measure in tort. R is true.

Step 5: Does R explain A?
Ask why damages in tort must be unliquidated rather than fixed.
Because the aim is to restore the claimant to his pre wrong position, the award has to match what this particular claimant actually lost in this particular incident. That loss is unknown until the wrong occurs and its effects are measured.
A figure fixed in advance could never do this. It would overpay one victim and underpay another. So the very object stated in R forces the damages to be assessed after the event, which is what "unliquidated" means. R gives the reason for A.

Step 6: Why the other options fail:
Option (B) denies the link, but the compensatory aim is exactly why the sum cannot be pre fixed.
Option (C) calls R false, but restitutio in integrum is the settled measure of tort damages.
Option (D) calls A false, but unliquidated damages are the standard tort remedy.

Step 7: Final Answer:
Both statements are true, and the aim of restoring the claimant to his earlier position is why the damages must be assessed by the court rather than fixed in advance.
\[ \boxed{\text{Option (A)}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top CLAT Legal Studies Questions

View More Questions

Top CLAT Law of Torts Questions

View More Questions

Top CLAT Questions

View More Questions