Skip to main content

Trespass to the Land

                      Trespass to the Land

As we all know, the law of torts has originally emanated from the English Common Law. One such law or the tort is Trespass to the land. It is derived from the legal maxim, ‘trespass quare clausam fregit’ which literally means the defendant broke or entered into the close. It essentially requires the possession of the property by the plaintiff and the encroachment upon that property in some or the other way. It requires no force or unlawful intention or damage or the breaking of an enclosure. The mention of the word ‘interference’ only implies the ‘permission’ which can be taken by the person in possession of the property or by virtue of authority. It doesn’t matter. The only thing which matters is obtaining the permission which necessarily should not be the owner. It should be the possessor. For example: the tenant living in the house can bring a law suit of trespass against anyone who tries to encroach the property. It can be the person outside also and the owner himself also. The reason behind it is when the owner or leaser gives a lease to the tenant then he is in the possession of the property and anyone during that time tries to enter into that property without the ‘permission’ of the tenant, then he is liable for the offence of trespass to the land and will be given punishment as mentioned in the law of land. Also, the property which has been encroached upon should be in direct possession of the plaintiff and not just a mere physical presence on it. The best example in this regard which can be given is if a plaintiff grows a tree and once forget to cut its branches which eventually grows and spread on the defendant’s land, in that case it should not be said as trespass to the land because the plaintiff has not directly encroached upon the defendant’s land. Its just that his property has somewhat spread or has a physical presence on the defendant’s land.

According to the Section 441[7] Indian Penal Code, 1860, the offence of trespass to the land is not criminalized but it still has recognition. According to that, ‘Trespass is an unjustifiable physical interference with the possession of property of the claimant with requisite intention of doing so’.  It is very important to note that here the word ‘intention’ is mentioned for the purpose. To constitute any offence under the criminal code, there are two requisites which has to be fulfilled that is the ‘actus reus’ and ‘mens rea’. Actus reus forms the physical part or act of the offence and Mens rea forms the mental part or act, which is also known as the criminal intention or criminal mind which accompanies the physical part or act of the offence. If these two parts have been proved in the court then the act will be constituted as a criminal act. Since, trespass is not a criminally recognized act but still it comes under the criminal code, so the intention matters.

Therefore, there are remedies also which are provided in the case of tort of trespass to the land in the form of damages and injunctions but the key takeway which can be taken from this is that the trespass to the land will only be constituted when there is a direct possession of the property by the defendant and not just the mere physical presence. Sometimes, the remedies may differ according to the situation prevailing because in India, the law of torts is largely uncodified and whatever is even there has emanated from the English Common law. So, it still has to go a long road.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more