1

SEMESTER-2

TOPIC- NUISANCE AND IT’S AFFECT ON SOCIETY

SUBMITTED TO:
PROF. AZIZ KAMAL SUKHLA

SUBMITTED BY:
SHIVANSH SHUBHAM
DIVISION- A
ROLL NO.: A027
B.A. L.L.B (Hons.)
2021-2026
 2

INTRODUCTION
A property owner has the legal right to enjoy his or her possessions without restriction. We can, however, claim
annoyance if another's inappropriate use or enjoyment of his property creates an illegal interference with his
pleasure or use of it, or part of his rights over it, or in connection with it.
Nuisance is an affront to a person's right to unrestricted enjoyment of his property caused by another person's
inappropriate use. Nuisance is a word that everyone understands, and we may state that it simply signifies an
annoyance to someone or something. Minor annoyances should be tolerated because they are unavoidable,
according to the law.

TYPES OF NUISANCE

PUBLIC NUISANCE:-

Anything that affects the general public or a subset of the general public is considered a public nuisance. It's
something that has a broad or indiscriminate impact on a group of people or a class of people. Because of its
source, effect, or destination, an annoyance might turn into a public nuisance. A public nuisance is one that
affects a social class or sector, and whether the number of individuals affected is sufficient to establish public
nuisance depends on the facts and circumstances of each case. Everything has to be viewed from a distance.

Public irritation includes obstruction of a highway or public roadways, public waterways, noise pollution, oil
leakage from multinational oil firms' activities, and carrying on unpleasant business, like maintaining a brothel
in a GRA. A public nuisance is usually a crime (see Criminal Code articles 234 and 192 and 194) that may only
be prosecuted by the Attorney General in his capacity as guardian of public rights. In other words, only the
AttorneyGeneral has the ability to prosecute a public nuisance offence.

In order to claim public nuisance, a private individual must demonstrate that he has suffered a unique or
additional loss or harm not sustained by other members of the public. According to Qguegbu JSC, the Supreme
Court stated in Daodu v. NNPC that "an obstruction of a public highway or impeding the free passage of the
public along the highway is a public nuisance," and that "a private individual has a right of action if he can
prove that he has suffered particular damage other than and beyond the general inconvenience and injury
suffered by the public and that the particular damage which he sustained was direct and substantiated." The
plaintiff will be able to satisfy the criterion of showing particular injury if he can establish that he has
experienced damage that is appreciably greater in degree than that sustained by the general public.
 3

It's worth noting that while a class or segment of the public frequently sues for public nuisance, the lawsuit
almost always fails because the court will almost always rule that a class action is illegal in such instances. This
is due to the fact that they are all private individuals, and hence unable to enforce public nuisance laws. It is best
to sue on an individual basis in order to prove that you have suffered more than others. Adediran v. Interland
Transport Ltd. (supra), in which the plaintiffs/appellants sued in a representative capacity for themselves and on
behalf of residents of a housing estate, the Supreme Court held that, while all of the injuries complained of are
caused by the same nuisance, each injury is a separate tort.

PRIVATE NUISANCE:-

The law of private nuisance protects the right of a landowner or business owner to use and enjoy his property.
This type of irritation is typically created by the defendant's own property or personal conduct. As a result, a
plaintiff must show that he has a legitimate claim to the property in dispute. As a result, the land cannot be made
available to the general public. The law of private nuisance seeks to strike a balance between two competing
interests: the occupier's right to use his land as he pleases and his neighbor's right to quiet enjoyment of his land.
As a result, no one may use their land in a way that is inconvenient to their neighbours.

In an action for private nuisance, the court considers the following:

i) Whether the injury complained of is sensible in the case of material damage to property and in the case
of interference with the enjoyment of land, whether the injury is substantial.
ii) Whether the conduct of the defendant is unlawful, unwarranted, or unreasonable.

Elements that constitute a private nuisance

●It must be arbitrary or unlawful to intervene. It is intended that the behaviour is not legally justifiable and that
no reasonable person would engage in it.

●Such interference must be in connection with the use or enjoyment of land, or with some rights over the
property, or with the property or bodily distress.

●There must be apparent damage to the property or interference with the property's usage to be termed a private
nuisance.
 4

REMEDIES OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF NUISANCE

The remedies are given in the form of:

Damages
A claimant must demonstrate extreme injury to be successful in getting compensation in a public nuisance
action. Tort damages are usually granted to put the aggrieved party back in the position they would have been in
if the tort had not happened. A monetary award issued to an individual as reparation for a loss or harm is
referred to as damages in legal terms.

Injunctive relief

An injunction is a legal and equitable remedy that takes the form of a special court order directing a party to do
or refrain from doing certain things. Injunctions are not available on a regular basis. The following case
examined whether a judge should exercise his or her discretion in denying an injunction.

The respondent's activities produced vibrations and commotions. Because an injunction would deprive many
Londoners of authority, the petitioner contended that the aggrieved party should be restricted to damages. The
court came to the conclusion that the option of not issuing an injunction should only be used in extraordinary
circumstances:

1) where the damage to the offended party’s lawful right is little; and

2) is fit for being evaluated in cash terms; and

3) is one which can be sufficiently remunerated by a little cash instalment; and

4) it is abusive to the litigant to concede an injunction.

A mix of the two harms and injunctive relief for isolated damages is affirmed.
 5

ABATEMENT

Abatement is a legal word that refers to a judicial action imposed on a litigant's argument of an issue, forbidding
the injured party from continuing the claim at that time or in that form. A legal term for the elimination or
management of a nuisance is abatement. This might involve the aggrieved party coming up with a remedy on
their own to stop the irritation, such as pruning overhanging branches that are invading the litigant's land.
Otherwise, the abator will end up as a trespasser. This form of treatment isn't always the best option.

Criminal Indictment (if there should be an occurrence of Public Nuisance as it were)

An indictment is a formal accusation levelled against someone who is suspected of committing a crime. For
claims of legal offences, indictments are frequently obtained. In the trial court, an indictment can be used
instead of a complaint.

The laws related to nuisance in india.

CONDITIONAL ORDER FOR REMOVAL OF NUISANCE AND CONSEQUENTIAL STEPS:

Conditional Order of Executive Magistrate

●Conditional Order for Removal of Nuisance-The purpose of this section is to avoid public nuisance; if a
magistrate fails to employ section 133 promptly, the public will suffer irreparable injury. Its goal is to reduce
public nuisances, and it can be utilised in an emergency if the nuisance is causing harm and immediate action is
required.

●An executive magistrate can use his or her powers under this section if he or she receives a police report or
other information about a public nuisance in one of the six situations listed in subsection (1). (1). This clause
allows a magistrate to deal with certain public nuisances and gives a summary remedy for their removal,
although there must be an immediate risk to property and a resulting public nuisance.

Section 133, Cr.P.C. dealing with public nuisance does not stand impliedly repealed by Pollution Acts:
 6

While the Code's operating area and the pollution laws in question are both designed to decrease irritation, they
are not the same. They are both experts in their fields, and there is no reason why they cannot work together.
While Section 133 of the Code is preventative, the provisions of the two Acts are not only curative, but also
preventive and penal. Because the phrases appear to be mutually exclusive, one can easily replace the other.
Above all, the High Court erred in ruling that Section 133 of the Cr. P.C. did not apply to the case.

B. Service or Notification of Order

If possible, the order will be served on the person against whom it is issued in the same manner as a summons.
The order shall be served to the person against whom it is made in the manner provided for service of summons.

●If such order cannot be served in this manner, it shall be announced by proclamation, published in such
manner as the State Government may regulate by regulations, and a copy thereof shall be struck up at such
location or places as may be most convenient for conveying the information to such person.

If an order issued under s. 134(1) is not served, the state government shall issue a proclamation, publish it in the
manner prescribed by the state government in this regard, and post a copy of the proclamation at a location from
which the information can be conveyed to the person against whom the order is issued.

C. Person to Whom Order is Addressed to Obey or Show Cause the Person Against Whom Such Order is Made
Shall—

 perform, within the time and in the manner specified in the order, the act directed thereby; or
 appear in accordance with such order and show cause against the same.

A person has two options under this section: either appear to do the activities required by the order within the
allotted period or demonstrate reason for his non-compliance with the order. A competent civil court must
eventually determine on the existence or non-existence of a public right after using judicial thinking and proper
evaluation of the evidences.

D. Consequences of his Failing to do so

 7

If such a person fails to carry out such an act or appear and show cause, he shall be punished under section 188
of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), and the order would become final. If a person fails to do so or appear to
show cause, he will be subject to the penalties set out in Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Whoever, knowing that, by an order promulgated by a public servant lawfully empowered to promulgate such
order, he is directed to abstain from a certain act, or to take certain order with certain property in his possession
or under his management disobeys such direction, shall, if such disobedience causes or tends to cause
obstruction, annoyance or injury, or risk of obstruction, annoyance or injury, to any persons lawfully employed,
be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or with fine which may
extend to two hundred rupees, or with both;
And if such disobedience puts human life, health, or safety in jeopardy, or causes or threatens to provoke a riot
or affray, the offender must be punished with either imprisonment or a fine of up to one thousand rupees, or
both.
21 Section 136 makes it plain that if a person fails to appear after receiving a preliminary order issued under
section 133, the preliminary order might be turned absolute. The magistrate cannot use section 136 to make the
preliminary order absolute if the individual appears or denies the public right but then fails to appear to lead
evidence.
CONCLUSION

The notion of annoyance appears in everyone's everyday life; in reality, Indian courts have drawn much from
English concepts and common law judgements while also generating their own precedents. This has aided the
development of the notion of annoyance in the area of law, ensuring the justice and well-being of all parties
who may be involved, such as the party who is impacted in the case of private nuisance, as well as the
community at large in the case of public nuisance.