ESSENTIALS OF TORT WITH RELEVANT CASE LAWS

  

1.2 TORTS

Submitted by

Devraj Agrawal

UID: UG21-08

Academic year (2021-2022)

B.A.LL.B. (Hons.) Semester- I

Submitted to

Dr. Rahul Sangoankar,

Assistant Professor of Law

MAHARASHTRA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NAGPUR

Table of cases

1. Rylands vs. Fletcher

2. Donoghue v. Stevenson case
3. Radhe Shyam v. Gur Prasad
4. Ashby v. White
5. “Bhim Singh v. State of J&K”
6. Gloucester Grammar School
7. “In Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor, Gow and Co
8. Ushaben v. BhagyaLaxmi Chitra Mandir
9. McLoughlin v O’Brian”
10. M/S. Hindustan Pencils Pvt. Ltd. vs M/S. India Stationery Products

1
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Page
Sr. no Topic
number
1.1 Introduction 4

1.2 Research problem 5

1.3 Research methodology 5

1.4 Aims and objective of project 5

1.5 Research questions 5

1.6 Review and literature 6

1.7 Scope and limitation 6

2.0 Types of tort 6

2.1 Tort of negligence 6

2.2 Intentional tort 7

2.3 Strict liability 7

3.0 Essentials of torts 9

3.1 “ The existence of duty of reasonable care owned to others ” 9

3.1.1 10
Negligence
3.1.2 Duty of care 10

3.1.3 Neighbor principle 10

3.2 Wrongful omission or commission of an act 11

3.3 Actual damage or legal injury 12

3.4 Remedy 13

2
3.4.1 Damage 14

3.4.2 Injunction 15

3.4.3 specific restitution of property 16

4.1 Conclusion and summary (mind map) 16

4.2 Reference 17

3
1.1 Introduction

A tort is a specific form of civil wrong. “A tort is defined as an act committed by one person
that causes injury to another or breaches the legal rights of another. The individual who
commits a tort is known as the tortfeasor. In tort proceedings, the aggrieved party must
establish that the harm sustained has a direct influence on the cause of action. Many areas of
law are codified in nature, but tort law is not, since it is not derived from a legislation, and it
is for this reason that tort law is sometimes referred to as judge created law. If, on the other
hand, the activity causes harm or injury to another person, the omission to perform such act is
referred to as tort”.1

The term tort derives from the Latin phrase tortum, which literally means "to twist" and
suggests twisted, or incorrect, behaviour. The word is defined by Salmond, a renowned jurist,
as "a civil wrong, independent of contract, for which the remedy is an action for damages." In
essence, tort law is an extension of the Latin adage, ubi jus ibi remedium, which states that
wherever there is a wrong, there is also a cure. 2 Some of the important definition of torts are
given by scholars mentioned below:

1. Tort is defined as "a civil wrong for which the remedy is a common law action for
unliquidated damages and which is not merely a breach of a contract, trust, or other
fundamentally equitable obligation." —Salmond.
2. Tort is defined as "a civil wrong that is not solely a violation of contract or breach of
trust—Section 2(m) of the Limitation Act of 1963”.
3. "It is a violation of a private individual's right in rem giving a right to compensation at
the injured party's suit." —Fraser
4. "Tortious Liability arises from a breach of a basically legal obligation: this duty is
due to the general public, and its failure is redressable by an action for unliquidated
damages." —Winfield.

1
“R.k.Bangia, law of torts, 2nd e, 2010, pp 1-2”
2
“Liability of the State for Torts Committed By Its Servants: Public Law and Private Law Perspectives, (2016)
6 GJLDP (April) 25”

4
The essential notion conveyed by both definitions is that, first, tort is a civil wrong, and
second, not every civil wrong is a tort. Other civil wrongs exist as well, the most serious of
which being violation of contract and breach of trust.3

1.2 Research problem

The project deal with law of torts and research problem is - detailed discussion of essentials
of law of tort presenting with relevant case laws

1.3 Research Methodology

This project effort is informational and analytical in nature. It is primarily concerned with the
examination of documents, and comparisons have been performed using secondary details,
such as webpages and blog postings. This endeavour is a doctrinal type of analysis based on
research centred on internet-accessible books, articles, and journals. The issues covered in
this research involve a study of various references on the subject, the majority of which were
obtained from internet sites. Footnotes and references are provided at the conclusion to
recognise the sources.

1.4 Aims & Objectives:

This study project aims to comprehend different types of torts with definitions, describe the
main elements of torts, and prove them with relevant case law by describing widely the
circumstances, legality, and facts of the case with reference to tort law.

1. Research the definition and types of torts.

2. To research all necessary tort aspects as well as relevant case law.
3. To discuss the many types of damages.

1.5 Research questions:

1. What are the different types of torts?

2. What are the fundamental features of tort?
3. What are the Rylands vs. Fletcher and Donoghue v. Stevenson cases?
4. What do “Damnum sine injuria and Injuria sine damnum mean”?

3
R.k.Bangia, law of torts, 2nd e, 2010 pp 4

5
1.6 Review of literature

A tort is a specific form of civil wrong. “A tort is defined as an act committed by one person
that causes injury to another or breaches the legal rights of another, there are four essentials
of tort .This research paper referred sources and books such as “Hilliard Francis, ‘Law of
Torts or Private Wrongs’ (Boston, Little, Brown and Company).” Gives detail idea of torts
and its essential elements and many more sources are referred and compiled together to write
this research paper.

1.7 Scope and limitation

Articles, journals and books published by reputed author are the sources used for writing the
research paper therefore it can be said that all are credible sources are used and information
provided here can be trusted upon

The cases and judgements mentioned are those which are accepted for proving relevant case
laws, it might have any limitation, amendment in future or any case contrary to the case
mentioned in research paper

2. Types of tort

Let’s discuss different types of torts before looking deeper into the essential elements of tort
law. There are three types of torts: “first, intentional tort; second, negligent tort; and third,
tort of strict liability”.

2.1 “Tort of negligence”

Personal injury cases are sometimes based on an allegation of negligence. Negligence is

defined as behaviour that goes below a reasonable level of care for the safety of others around
you. The state of mind of the actor differs between an intentional tort and a carelessness
claim. Even if a negligent person did not mean to cause injury, they are legally liable if their
reckless acts cause harm to another person.4 Four variables influence negligence. Four
variables influence negligence. Only if the plaintiff demonstrates all four of the following
factors will a negligence lawsuit be successful:

 Duty of Care: Using ordinary care to prevent causing harm to others is what the duty
of care includes. It is decided on an individual basis.

4
Punjab State Civil Supplies Corpn. Ltd. v. Sikander Singh, (2006) 3 SCC 736

6
  Breach: A breach of the defendant's duty of care occurs when he or she fails to
exercise reasonable care. It might be an act or omission that is incongruous with the
standard of care expected of a reasonably cautious individual.
 Defendant Was Responsible for the Plaintiff's Loss: The breach must be the legal
cause of the plaintiff's harm, including both the actual and proximate cause. Actual
causation occurs when the plaintiff would not have suffered harm if the breach had
not happened. When the form and extent of the injuries experienced are rationally
attributable to the breach, there is proximate causation.
 The plaintiff was hurt. Damages: The plaintiff must suffer losses that can be
compensated for financially. A simple violation of duty is not enough. Damages must
be hypothetical or contingent in character.

2.2 “Intentional tort”

“Intentional torts, on the other hand, occur when a person willfully behaves in a way that
causes injury to another person. Most states recognise many intentional torts, including
battery, assault, false imprisonment, intentional infliction of emotional distress, trespass to
land, trespass to chattels, and conversion.”5

 “Assault: An attempted battery or threatening injury when there is no battery”

 Battery is defined as any harmful or offensive touch with another individual. It is
applicable even if no physical injury happens
 Conversion: The process by which someone "converts" your property to their own. In
the criminal realm, it is referred to as stealing.
 Trespass: “Trespass to land and trespass to chattel, or personal property, are the two
forms of trespass. Trespassing in any scenario implies using the property without the
owner's consent”.
 False Imprisonment: “The unlawful detention of a person against her will by someone
with no legal authority or cause to do so”.

2.3 Strict liability

The "No Fault Liability" idea is another name for the Strict Liability principle. Only if the
plaintiff can demonstrate negligence on his part and the defendant is unable to deny it will he
be found liable for tort commission. The onus of carelessness can be avoided in the

5
“Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal v. State of Gujarat, (2013) 10 SCC 48”

7
circumstances I shall now describe. Regardless of the defendant's due care, he will invariably
be held liable for the consequences of any damages caused to any person outside the
defendant's land boundary by any hazardous thing that he kept on the same stretch of land,
i.e. the defendant can be held liable despite no intentional or unintentional fault of his,
explaining the term "There is no fault. This runs counter to the fundamental idea of
carelessness in torts, which stipulates that a person may be held liable”. The following are
some foundations of strict liability.

 Someone must have brought something lethal into his land.

 Whatever a person has brought or kept on his property must escape.
 It must be an unnatural use of land.

Rylands vs. Fletcher

There are times when a person may be held responsible for inflicting injury even if he was
not negligent in creating it, if there was no purpose to do it, or even if he took some good
efforts to avoid it. In other words, the law recognises 'NO FAULT' responsibility on occasion.
The guidelines established in the House of Lords judgement in RYLANDS V. FLETCHER
should be followed in this regard.

“The defendant (Fletcher), the owner of a mill in Answorth, engaged independent and
efficient engineers to construct a reservoir to supplement his mill's water supply. While
excavating the earth underneath, they came found various tunnels and passages but chose not
to stop them. When the reservoir was filled with water after it was completed, all of the water
surged down the unblocked old shafts and passages to the plaintiff's (Rylands) coal mines on
neighbouring territory and entirely buried them. The engineers kept the defendant in the dark
regarding the occurrence of these incidents. In a case brought before the court by the plaintiff
against the defendant, the judge found no fault on the defendant's part yet found him guilty
under the Strict Liability rule. Any amount of care on his part will not protect him if his
responsibility falls under the 'No Fault liability' limits”.6

Some exceptions to strict liability include the plaintiff's consent, the defendant's own default,
an act of stranger, an act of God or Vis Major, the plaintiff's and the defendant's common
benefit, and statutory authority.

6
Rylands v Fletcher [1868] UKHL 1 House of Lords

8
3. “Essential Elements of Tort”

A tort consists of four fundamental components:7

 The existence of a duty of reasonable care owed to others.

 The unlawful performance or omission of an act.
 Causation of actual loss or infringement of legal rights due to such improper deed or
omission.
 The remedy.

3.1 “The existence of a duty of reasonable care owed to others”

When performing any act that may cause damage to another person, everyone is required by
law to follow and maintain a reasonable level of care. To file a tort claim, it must be proven
that the injured party was owed a duty of care, which was then broken by the tortfeasor. The
injured party and the tortfeasor are not need to be directly related for a duty of care to exist;
rather, the obligation is imposed by law.

“Donoghue v. Stevenson case”

The case of Donoghue v. Stevenson, commonly known as the "snail in the bottle case," is a
landmark point in Western legal history. The decision in this case established the civil law tort
of negligence and required enterprises to owe a duty of care to their customers. Ms May
Donoghue was out shopping with a companion when she was offered a bottle of ginger beer.
The bottle eventually turned out to contain a rotting snail. Donoghue swallowed the most of
the liquid before becoming aware of the snail since the bottle was not made of transparent
glass. After that, she felt ill and was diagnosed with gastroenteritis by a doctor. Donoghue
then sued Mr David Stevenson, the ginger beer's producer. She filed a petition in the Court of
Sessions, Scotland's highest civil court, demanding £500 in damages.

Donoghue could not sue Stevenson for breach of contract since she did not buy the drink.
Instead, Donoghue's attorneys said that Stevenson breached his duty of care to his consumers
and caused injury via negligence. This area of civil law was substantially underdeveloped at
the time. Donoghue's conduct was challenged by Stevenson's counsel, who claimed that there
were no precedents for such a claim. They cited Donoghue's previous case, Mullen v. AG
Barr, in which a dead mouse was discovered in a soft drink container; the case was dismissed

7
“Hilliard Francis, ‘Law of Torts or Private Wrongs’ (Boston, Little, Brown and Company).”

9
by the justices due to a lack of precedence. Donoghue's first claim was dismissed, but she
was given permission to appeal to the House of Lords (which, at the time, had the judicial
authority to hear appellate cases). Lord Atkin's landmark decision in 1932 established
Stevenson's liability for the well-being of anybody who ingested his goods, even if they could
not be tested. The matter was remanded to the original court. Donoghue received less money
from Stevenson's estate since he died before the case was filed.8

3.1.1 Negligence

“To begin, the House of Lords' decision confirmed that carelessness was a tort. A plaintiff can
sue a responder in civil court if the respondent's carelessness causes the plaintiff suffering or
loss of property. Previously, the plaintiff had to prove a contractual relationship, such as the
sale of an object or an agreement to provide a service, in order to establish negligence.
Donoghue could not have a contractual connection with Stevenson since she did not purchase
the drink, but Lord Atkin's decision demonstrated that Stevenson was nonetheless liable for
the quality of his products.”9

3.1.2 Duty of care

“The case established that manufacturers bear a duty of care to their product's end users.
According to Lord Atkin's ratio decendi, a producer of things, which he sells... in the shape in
which they left him... owes a responsibility to the client to exert reasonable care." This
precedent has grown and now serves as the basis for legislation aimed at protecting customers
from tainted or defective goods. These safeguards were initially codified under common law,
but many have since been codified in legislation, such as the Trade Practices Act
(Commonwealth, 1974).

3.1.3 The neighbour principle.

Finally, the decision in Donoghue v. Stevenson spawned Lord Atkin's contentious "neighbour
concept," which extended the tort of negligence beyond the tortfeasor and the proximate
party. It called attention to the question of who may be hurt as a result of careless behaviour.
Donoghue, on the other hand, had gotten the ginger beer as a gift rather than purchasing it;
she was only a "neighbour" rather than a contract party. According to Atkin, this premise is:
“You must take reasonable precautions to avoid acts or omissions that you can reasonably
predict would cause harm to your neighbour. So, in law, who is my neighbour? The solution
8
Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] UKHL 100 (26 May 1932)
9
“https://www.legalbites.in/essentials-of-the-law-of-torts/”

10
appears to be individuals who are so intimately and immediately affected by my conduct that
I should keep them in mind when I am thinking these acts or omissions.”

3.2 “Wrongful Commission or Omission of an Act”

According to tort law, a person must have done something that he was not expected to do or
neglected to do something that he was required to do in order to be held liable for a tort.
“This implies that the person must have performed a positive wrongful act or an omission
that he should not have made, which would have held him liable. To evaluate if an act is
legally incorrect or not, we must assess whether the illegal conduct has a detrimental
influence on another person's legal rights.” Simply said, an act is an unlawful act under tort
law if it does some harm to another person's legal rights. 10 As a result, it is critical that the
legal right has a negative impact.

Radhe Shyam v. Gur Prasad

In the case of “Radhe Shyam v. Gur Prasad, Mr. Gur Prasad” filed a lawsuit against Mr.
Radhe Shyam seeking a permanent injunction prohibiting the defendant from establishing
and operating a flour mill on the defendant's property.11 The mill, according to the
complainant, was making too much noise and was causing her health difficulties. The
defendant was found to be causing a nuisance to the plaintiff and risking his health by
operating a flour mill near a residential area. The defendant was found to have been at fault.
Furthermore, in tort law, the act does not have to be unethical or socially unacceptable. Tort
law does not provide for remedy for moral or social harm. For example, refusing to feed a
dying man may be a moral or social wrong, but tort law will not afford a remedy since it is
not a legal wrong that affects a person's legal right. Tort law only provides a remedy for a
legal wrong, even if the damage is not moral or social in nature.

3.3 Actual Damage or Legal Injury

Tort law provides no relief if a wrong is done to someone but does not result in what the law
refers to as "legal injury" to that person. As a result, the harm should result in both legal and
monetary damages. The injury must be caused by a breach of a legal duty or a violation of
someone else's legal right. When a legal right is infringed, the violation is actionable whether
10
“Hilliard Francis, ‘Law of Torts or Private Wrongs’ (Boston, Little, Brown and Company) Read more at
Legal Bites © Reserved:  https://www.legalbites.in/essentials-of-the-law-of-
torts/”
11
Radhe Shyam v. Gur Prasad -AIR 1978 All 86.

11
or not the plaintiff has incurred additional injury. This mentality is encapsulated by the phrase
"Injuria sine damno."

“Injuria refers to an infringement of the plaintiff's right. Damnum denotes hurt, loss,
or damage to money, comfort, health, or the like”.

“Thus, if there has been injuria or a violation of a legal right but it has not been accompanied
by a damnum or harm to the plaintiff, the plaintiff can still seek redress in a court of law.

The Ashby v. White case is a landmark moment that exemplifies the principle injuria sine
damno. Despite the fact that the defendant's conduct did not inflict any harm, the plaintiff
prevailed in this instance. The plaintiff was a qualified voter in a Parliamentary election, but
the defendant, a returning officer, wrongly refused to recognise her vote. This rejection
resulted in no loss because the candidate for whom he intended to vote won the election.
However, the defendant was found guilty because he failed to exercise the plaintiff's lawful
right to vote.”

In "Bhim Singh v. State of J&K," the petitioner, a J&K assembly MLA, was wrongfully
arrested by police on his way to the assembly session. He did not appear before the
magistrate within the time restriction set. As a result, the member's constitutional right to
attend an Assembly session was violated. As a result, it was determined that Bhim Singh's
legal rights were infringed in this case.12 “Because what is actionable is a violation of a legal
right, it follows that when there is no violation of a legal right, no action can be brought in a
court of law, even if the defendant's act caused the plaintiff some loss, harm, or damage. The
maxim Damnum sine injuria expresses this. This means that any injury that does not
result from a violation of a legal right is not actionable in a court of law”.

This is because no action should be taken if the defendant's interference with the rights of
another person is not unlawful or unauthorised, but is a necessary result of the defendant
exercising his own legitimate rights. Thus, the primary criterion for determining whether or
not the defendant should be held liable is not whether or not the plaintiff experienced any
damage, but whether or not any genuine right vested in the plaintiff was infringed. It refers to
damage that does not include an unauthorised interference with the plaintiff's legal rights.
This is frequently the case when one party's exercise of a legal right results in considerable
harm to the other.

12
Bhim Singh v. State of J&K 1984 (1) SCC 504.

12
The case of Gloucester Grammar School exemplifies the concept. There, the defendant, a
schoolmaster, founded a competing school to the plaintiffs'. Due to competition, the plaintiffs
were forced to decrease their expenses from 40 pence per scholar per quarter to 12 cents per
scholar per quarter. It was decided that the plaintiffs had no legal recourse for their injuries.13

In Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor, Gow and Co. a group of steamship firms banded
together and offered reduced freight to push the plaintiff out of the tea-carrying business..
According to the House of Lords, the plaintiff had no cause of action since the defendants
had acted legally to safeguard and extend their trade and maximise their profits.14

The plaintiff in “Ushaben v. BhagyaLaxmi Chitra Mandir” requested an injunction to

prohibit the defendant from showing the film Jai Santoshi Ma. The picture was said to insult
religious sensibilities. The defendant, however, was not held responsible since offending
religious sensitivities was not a legal offence.15

To summarise the preceding discussion, “it is essential to a tort action that the act complained
of be legally wrongful as regards the party complaining; that is, it must prejudicially affect
him in some legal right; merely that it will, however directly, do a man harm in his interests,
is not enough.”16

3.4 Remedy

Every problem, as previously said, has a solution. It would be meaningless to provide rights if
there was no redress if those rights were violated. Likewise, tort law requires precise legal
remedies for injured parties, such as monetary damages, defined property restitution, and
Court-granted injunctions. Before awarding any remedy to the claimant, the Court assesses
essential components of culpability using criteria such as the test of directness, the test of
foreseeability, and others to determine the remoteness of the damage caused.17

3.4.1 Damages

Damages, often known as legal damages, are sums of money given to the damaged party to
return them to their pre-tort state. They are paid to a plaintiff to assist them in recovering their

13
Gloucester Grammar School (1410) YB Hill 11 Hen
14
Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor, Gow and Co (1892) AC 25.
15
Ushaben v. BhagyaLaxmi Chitra Mandir -AIR 1978 Guj 13.
16
Rogers v. Rajendra Dutt (1860) 13 Moore PC 209.
17
Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, In re, (2017) 10 SCC 658

13
damages. In a tort action, the principal remedy is monetary compensation. “The term
damages should not be used interchangeably with the plural of "damage," which generally
refers to "hurt" or "injury."

Types of damages

There are four sorts of damages depending on the ‘objective' of the compensation, that is,
whether the plaintiff is to be reimbursed or the defendant is to be ‘punished.'18

1. Contemptuous damages- also known as humiliating damages, are incurred when

someone is treated with contempt. When the plaintiff is at fault and cannot be said to be
totally "aggrieved," the amount of money granted by the court in this situation demonstrates
the judge's displeasure.

2. “Nominal damages are awarded when a plaintiff's legal right is infringed but no real harm
results. In the case of trespass, for example, even if no damage is done, a legal right is
infringed. The purpose of this case is not to compensate the plaintiff.”

3. “Substantial damages are awarded when the plaintiff is compensated for the specific loss
he suffered as a result of the tor”.

4. “Exemplary/punitive– These are the most valuable. Punitive damages are awarded where
the defendant was completely unaware of the plaintiff's rights and caused severe harm to the
defendant. The objective here is to create a public example that will make others think twice
before doing something similar in the future”.

Cases

“McLoughlin v O’Brian”

As a consequence of the defendant's carelessness, the plaintiff's spouse and three children
were engaged in an accident with the defendant. The plaintiff was in profound sorrow after
watching her spouse and children being severely injured and learning of one of her children's
death. The House of Lords decided in McLoughlin's favour, and she was also awarded
damages for her nervous upset.

3.4.2 Injunction

18
Jurisdiction Issues In International Tort Litigation: A Singapore View, (1995) 7 SAcLJ 1

14
“ In torts, an injunction is an equitable remedy that can be granted at the discretion of the court.
An equitable remedy is one in which the court, rather than paying the injured party, orders the
other party to keep his end of the bargain. So, when a court orders someone to stop doing
something or to do something positive in order to compensate the offended party, the court is
issuing an injunction.19 A simple example would be a court directing a construction company
to build on land near a hospital because the construction noises may be creating a nuisance to
the facility. An injunction is a court order that forbids a person from continuing to conduct an
unlawful act or instructs the person to undertake a positive act to reverse the consequences of
his wrongful act, i.e., to make good what he has wrongly done. To get an injunction against a
party, real or probable injury must be demonstrated (apprehended damage). An injunction
might be temporary or permanent, and it can be mandatory or prohibitory. Let's go over them
one by one. Let us go over each one individually. Injunction law is included in the Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908, as well as Sections 37 to 42 of the Specific Relief Act (henceforth
referred to as the Act), 1963 ”..

“ An injunction claim can be brought against any individual, group, or even the state. There are
two types of injunctions, according to Section 37 of the Act: temporary and perpetual
(permanent). ”

Case

“M/S. Hindustan Pencils Pvt. Ltd. vs M/S. India Stationery Products”

“ In this case, the plaintiff filed a suit for perpetual injunction against M/s. India Stationery
Products for trademark infringement on their product 'Nataraj,' which included pencils, pens,
sharpners, erasers, and other items, claiming that the trademark was adopted by them in 1961
and that the defendants had incorrectly registered a copyright similar to them. The court
decided in the petitioner's favour and granted an injunction against the defendant. ”

3.4.3 Specific Restitution of Property

The final judicial remedy available under Tort Law is Specific Restitution of Property. The
restoration of property to its rightful owner is referred to as restitution. When a person's
property or things are unlawfully taken away from him, he has the right to get them
returned.20

19
Bank of India v. Lekhimoni Das, (2000) 3 SCC 640
20
Ganga Retreat & Towers Ltd. v. State of Rajasthan, (2003) 12 SCC 91

15
 4.1 Conclusion and summary

“ We began with a detailed overview of tort kinds, and then explained the four key principles of
tort law in this article. The four parts (obligation, wrongful act, injury, and remedy) create a
chain, and if even one link in the chain is lacking, it does not establish a tort. We researched
each essential of torts with sub-types and analysed them thoroughly using relevant case laws . ”

Type of torts

1. Tort of negligence 2. Intentional tort 3. Strict liability

Essentials of tort

1. The existence of 2. Wrongful

3. Actual damage or
“

duty of reasonable commission or 4. Remedy

legal injury
care owned to others ” omission of an act

A. Negligence A. Damage B. Injunction C. Specific restitution of property

B. Duty of Care

i. Contemptuous Damage iii. Substantial Damage

C. Neighbour principle
eighbprinciple\
ii. Nominal Damage iv. Exemplary Damage

16
4.2 Reference

1. Bank of India v. Lekhimoni Das, (2000) 3 SCC 640

2. Bhim Singh v. State of J&K 1984 (1) SCC 504.
3. Donoghue v Stevenson [1932] UKHL 100 (26 May 1932)
4. Gloucester Grammar School (1410) YB Hill 11 Hen
5. https://www.legalbites.in/essentials-of-the-law-of-torts/
6. Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, In re, (2017) 10 SCC 658
7. Jurisdiction Issues In International Tort Litigation: A Singapore View, (1995) 7
SAcLJ 1
8. Law Perspectives, (2016) 6 GJLDP (April) 25
9. “Liability of the State for Torts Committed By Its Servants: Public Law and Private”
10. Mogul Steamship Co. v. McGregor, Gow and Co (1892) AC 25.
11. Pinakin Mahipatray Rawal v. State of Gujarat, (2013) 10 SCC 48
12. Punjab State Civil Supplies Corpn. Ltd. v. Sikander Singh, (2006) 3 SCC 736
13. Radhe Shyam v. Gur Prasad -AIR 1978 All 86
14. "R.k.Bangia, law of torts, 2nd e, 2010, pp 1-2”
15. Rogers v. Rajendra Dutt (1860) 13 Moore PC 209.
16. Rylands v Fletcher [1868] UKHL 1 House of Lords
17. Ushaben v. BhagyaLaxmi Chitra Mandir -AIR 1978 Guj 13.

17
18