Which of the following cases does not explain the maxim ‘Damnum Sine Injuria’?
In the case of Bhim Singh Vs. State of J and K, the principle of Injuria Sine Damnum was applied. In this instance, Bhim Singh was a member of the J&k State Legislative Assembly who was detained by state police while on his way to a legislative assembly vote and detained indefinitely without charge. His wife filed a Habeas Corpus petition to gain his malafide release. The apex Court determined MLA Bhim Singh’s democratic right & awarded him Rs. 50,000 in compensatory losses. In addition, the appropriate police official was penalized for neglect of duty and misconduct.
32 of (16/8) of (30/24) of (120/x) = 30
5 × 14 + 100 ÷ 4 = 62 + ?
18(1/3) + 9(2/3) – 10(1/3) = 1(2/3) + ?
What is the place value of 6 in 367892141?
32 + 26 × (484 ÷ 44) + 450 ÷ 9 = ?
132 × 3 ÷ 11 + 67 − ? = 64 ÷ 8 × 2
√(1889 – 125) + √(841 – 165) = ?
40% of 1820 + 80% of 630 = 90% of 1280 + ?
17% of 250 + ? = 108
Simplify-
x + 3(y + x – 2) – (x + y).