Skip to main content

Recent Developments in Law of Tort

 RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN LAW OF TORT

By: Robin Pandey                                                                                                 Date: 25/February/2022

Rule of No Fault Liability

 In spite of the above mentioned difficulties, the Law of Torts in India is developing. The main reasons for this is expansion of education and political consciousness in the Indian society about their rights. The tort litigation is increasing. Particularly, under the Motors Vehicles Act, 1988, now-a-days number of cases are going to the Courts. The main reasons for this is that the court fee is not charged on the basis of valuation and the claims are decided without delay by the Claims Tribunals. Under the Act there is a provision for compulsory compensation to be given in hit and run cases and in certain cases the principle of 'no fault liability' has been recognised. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 provides that in cases of death Rs. 50,000 and in cases of permanent incapacity Rs. 25,000/- compensation is payable to the person. 

Rule of Absolute Liability 

Indian Courts have refused to follow some of the doctrines of Law of Torts as established by the English Courts in the 19th century. The Supreme Court of India in the landmark decision in M.C. Mehta v. UOI , has established a new doctrine, “Doctrine of absolute liability", in place of the doctrine of strict liability which was established in the famous Case of Ryland v. Fletcher,  to deal with new situations in Society arising out of modern industrial development. There are certain exceptions to the rule of strict liability while present doctrine is absolute and not subject to any exceptions.

The Supreme Court of India has laid down the rule as follows: "Where an enterprise is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and harm results to anyone on account of an accident in the operation of such hazardous and inherently dangerous activity resulting, for example, in escape of toxic gas, the enterprise is strictly and absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any of the exceptions which operates vis-a-vis the tortious principle of strict liability." 

In that case the harm was caused by the escape of olium gas from one of the units of Shriram Food and Fertiliser Industries which was situated in a residential area in Delhi. The court held that the rule of Rylands v. Fletcher, which was laid down in the 19th century by the English Highest Court does not fully meet the needs of a modern industrial society with highly developed scientific knowledge and technology where hazardous or inherently dangerous industries are necessary to be established as a development programme and therefore there is need to lay down new rule not yet recognised by English law, to deal with the problems arising in a highly industrialised economy.

After Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster and the controversies that ensued thereafter, courts, especially the Apex Court, have taken a liberal view in case of tort. In Jai Laxmi Salt Works (P) Ltd. v. State of Gujarat, a Division Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh and Mr. Justice R.M. Sahai observed that an action for tort was usually a claim for pecuniary compensation for damages which a plaintiff suffers as a result of the invasion of a legally protected interest. Since the law of torts is a developing law, its frontiers cannot be strictly barricaded. Their Lordships further observed that the entire law of tort is founded on morality that no one has a right to harm others. In this case, due to the rise of flood level, the water of the pond filtered into the factory premises of the appellant. In a claim for damages filed by the appellant, the State took the defence of act of God and limitation.

 The trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that there was no negligence on the part of State as it was an act of God. In appeal the High Court recorded its findings in favour of the appellant but rejected the claim Tor compensation on the ground of limitation based on Article 36 of the Limitation Act, 1908, as it stood before 1963 to claim damages founded on negligence. The appellant filed an appeal against the decision of the High Court. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and observed: If the construction of a bundh is a common law or public duty, then any loss or damage arising out of it gives rise to tortuous liability not in the conservative sense but certainly in the modern and developing sense. A common man cannot be left high and dry because wrongdoer is the State. The basic element of tort is duty. And that comes into play fully when there is common law duty."


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

INCOME TAX SECTION 32AD - Investment in new plant or machinery in notified backward areas in certain States

 Description (1) Where an assessee, sets up an undertaking or enterprise for manufacture or production of any article or thing, on or after the 1st day of April, 2015 in any backward area notified by the Central Government in this behalf, in the State of Andhra Pradesh or in the State of Bihar or in the State of Telangana or in the State of West Bengal, and acquires and installs any new asset for the purposes of the said undertaking or enterprise during the period beginning on the 1st day of April, 2015 and ending before the 1st day of April, 2020 in the said backward area, then, there shall be allowed a deduction of a sum equal to fifteen per cent of the actual cost of such new asset for the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which such new asset is installed. (2) If any new asset acquired and installed by the assessee is sold or otherwise transferred, except in connection with the amalgamation or demerger or re-organisation of business referred to in clause (xiii)or cla

60 Minute Marriage Counselling Session On Phone

Description A 60 minute phone call with an expert Marriage\Relationship Counselor to discuss your marriage\relationship related issues. Counselling aims to resolve issues and improve communication in a relationship. Couples’ counselling works with both people in the relationship, however sessions can start with one individual, working towards the involvement of the other partner. What's Included a) 60 minute phone call with the counselor where you can discuss all your issues and seek guidance. What's Not Included a) Counselling session via meeting

Send Legal Notice for Divorce

 India being a secular country derives a large part of its laws from various religious practices. One such area of law is Divorce law of India. A divorce case in India can be initiated by either party based on the procedure relevant as per the law applicable to the parties. However, the procedure for divorce always starts with sending a legal notice.   Either party can send a legal notice to the other spouse intimating his/her intent to initiate legal proceedings for divorce. Sending a legal notice acts as a formal way of communication by one party to the other acting as a warning and at the same time creating chances for a last attempt for conciliation, if possible. Connect with an expert lawyer for your legal issue   What is a legal notice for divorce? A legal notice refers to a formal communication to a person or the opposite party in a case, informing him/her about one’s intention to undertake legal proceedings against him/her. Therefore, a legal notice for divorce is a formal inti