NIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM & ENERGY S UNIVERSITY OF STUDIES COLLEGE OF LEGAL STUDIES
B. A. L.L. B (HONS.)- “B” SEMESTER-III ACADEMIC YEAR: 2015 2015-1 -16 6
ULY-DECEMBER SESSION: JULY
PROJECT ORT T NEED FOR CODIFICATION OF LAW OF TOR
FOR Law of Tort Undr t! S"#r$%%on of' M( Poo)a Ga"ta* NAME' SAP NO' ,./001 ROLL NO' R0,.2340
1
LOVLEEN MIS+RA
Table of Content I(
II(
Ta56 of of a" a"t!or%t%( 2(
Ca
.(
Stat"t
3(
Intrnt So"r7
0(
Art%76 & Ot Ot!r So So"r7
Introd"7t%on( 2(
D8n%t%on
.(
9%nd of tort
III(( III
E$o6 E$ o6"t "t%o %on n and and d$ d$6o 6o#* #*n ntt of to tort rt 6aw 6aw((
IV(
Ind%an S7 S7nar%o
V(
Tort 6aw %n Ind%a
VI(( VI
Nd N d for for rf rfor or*% *%n: n: and and 7od 7od%f %f;%n ;%n: : tort tort 6aw 6aw
VII( VI I( S# S#7 7%a %a66 7a 7a ana ana6; 6;% % 2(
.(
U#!aar 7%n*a 7a
VIII( VII I( Con Con76" 76"%o %on n
2
Table of Content I(
II(
Ta56 of of a" a"t!or%t%( 2(
Ca
.(
Stat"t
3(
Intrnt So"r7
0(
Art%76 & Ot Ot!r So So"r7
Introd"7t%on( 2(
D8n%t%on
.(
9%nd of tort
III(( III
E$o6 E$ o6"t "t%o %on n and and d$ d$6o 6o#* #*n ntt of to tort rt 6aw 6aw((
IV(
Ind%an S7 S7nar%o
V(
Tort 6aw %n Ind%a
VI(( VI
Nd N d for for rf rfor or*% *%n: n: and and 7od 7od%f %f;%n ;%n: : tort tort 6aw 6aw
VII( VI I( S# S#7 7%a %a66 7a 7a ana ana6; 6;% % 2(
.(
U#!aar 7%n*a 7a
VIII( VII I( Con Con76" 76"%o %on n
2
CASES 1. 2. 3. . !. . .
Donogh Donoghue ue v. v. Stev Stevens enson' on'ss Smt Nilabati Nilabati Behra Behra aliasla aliaslalit lit 1993 1993 SCR (2 (2 !"1 v state state of #rissa #rissa R$lan R$lan%s %s v. v. &leth &lether er ).C.)e ).C.)ehta hta v. v. *nion *nion of of +n%ia +n%ia *nion Carbi%e Carbi%e Cor,ora Cor,oration tion -t%. -t%. vs. *nion *nion #f #f +n%ia +n%ia )unii,al )unii,al Counil/ Counil/ Ratlam Ratlam vs. 0a 0ar%ihan r%ihan n% n% #rs -ata a%h4a vs. State State of Bihar Bihar
". 5. 0e 0en6atesh4arlu vs. )anaging )anaging Diretor/ Diretor/ Nagar7una1 9. 5e4al Chan% Chan% )iman )imani(% i(% b$ b$ -rs. v S.5. S.5. Sen. Sen. an% #rs #rs2 18.Bhim Singh v. State of ammu an% 5ashmir 3 11.Ru%al Shah v. State of Bihar 12.:ari6rishan an% State of :ar$ana v. Suhbir !
1 K. Venkateshwarlu vs. Managing Director [2005]= [2006] CJ !" NC 2 Kwela Chand Mimani(d) by Lrs. v S.K. Sen and rs [2001]# $ SCR 1056. $!him Singh v. State o" #ammu and Kashmir AIR AIR [1%&6]# SC !%! ! $udal Shah v. State o" !ihar [1%&$] SC 10$6
5%arikrishan and State o" %aryana v. Suhbir AIR [1%&&]# SC 212"# '.21$1 $
STATUTES 1. THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988
2. HE AER (RE*ENION AND CONROL O+ OLLUION) AC 1%"!# $. HE AIR (RE*ENION AND CONROL O+ OLLUION) AC# 1%&1
!
INTERNET SOURCES
1. htt,;<<444.nolo.om
Bhe6e%A28S@>C+&+CA28R>-+>&A28CT.,%f 12. htt,;<<444.in%ian6anoon.org<%o<1812< 13. htt,;<<444.merriam=4ebster.om<%itionar$
5
INTRODUCTION
Definition of Tort The term tort is the &renh euivalent of the >nglish 4or% 4rong. The 4or% tort is also %erive% from the -atin 4or% tortum/ 4hih means t4iste% or roo6e% or 4rong/ in ontrast to the 4or% retum/ 4hih means straight (retitu%e uses that -atin root. Thus on%ut that is t4iste% or roo6e% an% not straight is a tort. The term 4as intro%ue% into the >nglish la4 b $ the Norman 7urists. >arlier the 4or% tort 4as use% in ever$%a$ s,eehE to%a$ it is left to the legal s$stem. 7u%ge 4ill instrut a 7ur$ that a tort is usuall$ %efine% as a 4rong for 4hih the la4 4ill ,rovi%e a reme%$/ most often in the form of mone$ %amages. The la4 %oes not reme%$ all F4rongs. The ,ree%ing %efinition of tort %oes not reveal the un%erl$ing ,rini,les that %ivi%e 4rongs in the legal s,here from those in the moral s,here. :urting someoneGs feelings ma$ be more %evastating than sa$ing something untrue about him behin% his ba6E $et the la4 4ill not ,rovi%e a reme%$ for sa$ing something ruel to someone %iretl$/ 4hile it ma$ ,rovi%e a reme%$ for H%efamingH someone/ orall$ or in 4riting/ to others i.e. la4 see6s to ,rovi%e 7ustie for a legal in7ur$ " 4hih ma$ be %efine% s,eifiall$ b$ the legal s$stem of an ountr$. lthough the 4or% is no longer in general use/ tort suits are the stuff of ever$%a$ hea%lines. )ore an% more ,eo,le in7ure% b$ eI,osure to a variet$ of ris6s no4 see6 re%ress i.e. a sort of reme%$ through the 6, / 3 4 / O7 +89, 8 A8;7/-+89, <=/=< (8>?@)# ,9, 3 4 / M47 L=8 =/=?# S O878 E=@/7/;@ D9=/8@ ". , / 3 4 / O7 +89, 8 A8;7/-+89, <=/=< (8>?@)# ,9, 3 4 / M47 L=8 =/=?# S O878 E=@/7/;@ D9=/8@ & , C; B?3833 E8;73, D9=/8@ (C; U843=@ 33) D8=/8 / 7;7 8>?@ 8/?8 6
ourts. The ever$%a$ a4ar%ing of multimillion suits against %otors/ fator$ o4ner et are all eIam,les of om,ensation grante% b$ the la4 to the ,laintiff (the one 4ho is 4ronge% b $ a tort. The la4 of torts %evelo,e% almost entirel$ in the ommon=la4 ourts 9E that is/ statutes ,asse% b$ legislatures 4ere not the soure of la4 that ,laintiffs usuall$ relie% on. *suall$/ ,laintiffs 4oul% rel$ on the ommon la4 (7u%iial %eisions. Through thousan%s of ases/ the ourts have fashione% a series of rules that govern the on%ut of in%ivi%uals in their no ontratual %ealings 4ith eah other. Through ontrats/ in%ivi%uals an raft their o4n rights an% res,onsibilities to4ar% eah other. +n the absene of ontrats/ tort la4 hol%s in%ivi%uals legall$ aountable for the onseuenes of their ations. Those 4ho suffer losses at the han%s of others an be om,ensate%.18 Commonl$ tort is onfuse% 4ith rime man$ ats (li6e homii%e are both riminal an% tortuous. But torts an% rimes are %ifferent/ an% the %ifferene is 4orth noting. rime is an at against the ,eo,le as a 4hole11. Soiet$ ,unishes the mur%ererE it %oes not usuall$ om,ensate the famil$ of the vitim. Tort la4/ on the other han%/ vie4s the %eath as a ,rivate 4rong for 4hih %amages are o4e%. +n a ivil ase/ the tort vitim or his famil$/ not the state/ brings the ation12. The 7u%gment against a %efen%ant in a ivil tort suit is usuall$ eI,resse% in monetar$ terms/ not in terms of ,rison times or fines/ an% is the legal s$stemGs 4a$ of tr$ing to ma6e u, for the vitimGs loss.
Kinds of Torts There are three 6in%s of torts; intentional torts/ negligent torts/ an% strit liabilit$ torts 13. +ntentional torts arise from intentional ats/ 4hereas unintentional torts often result from arelessness (e.g./ 4hen a
% S=4 R?3377 & brie" history o" 'ndians# /=3 8 E8;73, 9//8 7 10 M. B?338 8 A. S/ 3. E E7; (201$) Comarative ort Law $esearch %andbooks in Comarative Law* /= D;3 / N/8-9/8/9 L/333 (8 933 / ',@397 8>?@ =/ =, '3/8) 11 R=877 8 D,>77 he law o" torts +,rd edition (, 8 9/'8@#N;'?) 12 F/7; JC# the constitutional status o" tort law- Due rocess and the right to a law "or the redress o" wrongs . (Y7 L J/?87 2005). 1$ . S. A=9,?=,8 77 * he Law o" ort (E3=8 B// C/# & E# 1%&"). "
surgial team fails to remove a lam, from a ,atientGs ab%omen 4hen the o,eration is finishe% 1. Both intentional torts an% negligent torts im,l$ some fault on the ,art of the %efen%ant. +n strit liabilit$ torts/ b$ ontrast/ there ma$ be no fault at all/ but tort la4 4ill sometimes reuire a %efen%ant to ma6e u, for the vitimGs losses even 4here the %efen%ant 4as not areless an% %i% not inten% to %o harm. The stan%ar% ation un%er tort is negligene1!. The tort of negligene gives a ause of ation This lea%s to %amages/ or to relief/ in eah ase ,lanne% to ,rotet legal rights/ inlu%ing those of @rivate safet$/ ,ro,ert$/ an%/ in some ases/ intangible eonomi interests. Negligent ations +nlu%e laims oming mainl$ from ar ai%ents an% ,rivate in7ur$ ai%ents of %ifferent 6in%s/ +nlu%ing linial negligene/ 4or6ers negligene/ et. @ro%ut liabilit$ (4arranties an% the li6e ases an also be onsi%ere% as negligene ations/ but there is freuentl$ a note4orth$ overla$ of some a%%itional la4ful ontent e.g. Donoghue v. Stevenson's1. mong intentional torts there ma$ be ertain torts oming from the ou,ation or use of lan%. #ne of 4hih is the tort of nuisane/ 4hih ta6es into aount strit liabilit$ for a neighbor 4ho hin%ers anotherGs en7o$ment of his o4n ,ro,ert$1. Tres,ass ,ermits o4ners to sue for entranes b$ an in%ivi%ual (or his struture/ for eIam,le = an overhanging buil%ing on their lan%. There is also a tort of false im,risonment/ an% another tort of %efamation/ 4here someone reates an unsu,,ortable reason for rrest or their s,eeh is not re,resente% to be fatual 4hih some4hat %amages the re,utation of another. or6ers' om,ensation la4s 4ere a legislative ans4er to the ommon la4 torts or%er ,laing
1! . S. A=9,?=,8 77 * he Law o" ort (E3=8 B// C/# & E# 1%&").
15 OG/ ?843=@ '33 # /negligence# 1 [201$] 16 A88?7 S?4@ / I8=8=/87 C/'=4 L# 0errari 0. (112). Donoghue v. Stevenson3s 45th &nniversary
1" 883@748 N?389 L#, 883@748 S== U843=@# , D983/8 S9,//7 / L J +9# ,==':KK7.'3?.?K7K;7K883@748N?389L.'
&
-imits on to the eItent to 4hih 4or6ers oul% sue their em,lo$ers in relation to in7uries sustaine% %uring em,lo$ment.1" Co%ifiation of the tort la4 in +n%ia has been a muh %ebate% to,i beause in a ountr$ li6e +n%ia here there are ver$ goo% o%ifie% la4s li6e Co%e of riminal ,roe%ure an% ivil ,roe%ure o%e tort la4 being un%efine% %oes uestion the -egislativeGs intent on bringing un%er ontrol ivil 4rong/ but the legislative an% the eIeutive annot onl$ be blame% for tort as it is the soiet$Gs tolerane level 4ith ivil 4rongs that %efines ho4 la4 of tort is im,lemente% an% the ma7orit$ ,eo,le in +n%ia 4ho %onGt ,a$ muh hee% to other in%ivi%ualGs rights it is %iffiult to bring about a sea of hange even 4ith o%if$ing tort la4 . But nonetheless it is an ae,te% fat that tort la4 is still in its nasent stage in +n%ia an% still un%er%evelo,e% beause issues li6e fiIing a ,artiular ,erimeter for a4ar%ing om,ensation/ %ifferentiating t$,es of negligene are not a%%resse%/ even to%a$ in +n%ia ases are %ei%e% in +n%ia b$ 7u%ges on su,erfiial ,arameters li6e the ,a$ing ,o4er of the res,on%ent. lthough institutions li6e the national onsumer forum et. have been forme% to a%%ress grievanes of the ,ubli but still the$ have not been able to substitute for the im,at that a o%ifie% tort la4 4oul% have ha% in safeguar%ing in%ivi%ual interest.
1& 6orklace 'n7ury- 6hen 8ou Can Sue utside o" 6orkers3 Comensation,==':KK.8/7/.9/K7;7-89@97/'K/'79-8>?@-73?=-3?-$0$$!.,=7
%
Evolution and development of tort law tort is a ivil 4rong for 4hih the reme%$ is an ation for unliui%ate% %amages an% 4hih is not eIlusivel$ the breah of a ontrat/ or the breah of a trust/ or the breah of other merel$ euitable obligationJ= Salmon% 19 The term tort 4as intro%ue% into the terminolog$ of >nglish -a4 b$ the &renh s,ea6ing la4$ers an% u%ges of the Courts of Norman%$ an% ngevin 5ings of >nglan% 28. s a tehnial term of >nglish la4/ tort has auire% a s,eial meaning as a s,eies of ivil in7ur$ or 4rong. Till about the mi%%le of the seventeenth Centur$ tort 4as an obsure term/ at a time 4hen ,roe%ure 4as onsi%ere% more im,ortant than the right of an in%ivi%ual21. This em,hasis on ,roe%ural as,et for %etermining the suess for a ase ontinue% for some !88 $ears/ till 1"!2/ 4hen the Common -a4 @roe%ure t 4as ,asse% an% ,rima$ of substane over the ,roe%ure gra%uall$ gaine% firmer groun%. To%a$ the maIim as it stan%s is ubi 7us ubi reme%ium22/ i.e. 4here there is right there is reme%$. Tort is the &renh euivalent of the >nglish 4or% 4rong an% of the Roman la4 term %elit 23. +t is eI,ete% out of ever$one to behave in a straightfor4ar% manner an% 4hen one %eviates from this straight ,ath into roo6e% 4a$s he is sai% to have ommitte% a tort. Though man$ ,rominent 4riters have trie% to %efine Tort/ it is %iffiult to %o so for varie% reasons. The 6e$ reason among this being/ that the la4 of Torts is base% on %ei%e% ases i.e.
1% J/,8 77 S7/8# #urisrudence* r* the heory o" the Law . (1%0") 20 J/,8 F778;,# he &ngevin 9mire ' 2! 21 J/,8 F778;,# he &ngevin 9mire ' 2! 22 o:"ord university ress* ubi 7us ibi remedium +5+ 2$ 9ncycloedia !ritannica ,==':KK.=889.9/KEB9,9K=/'9K50""5%KR/87 10
%otrine of ,ree%ene2 2!. u%ges 4hile %ei%ing a ase/ feel their ,rimar$ %ut$ is to a%7u%ge the ase on han% rather than to la$ %o4n 4i%er rules an% hene the$ sel%om la$ %o4n an$ %efinition of a legal term. &urthermore the la4 of tort is still gro4ing. +f a thing is gro4ing no satisfator$ %efinition an be given. Tort as 4e 6no4 to%a$ has evolve% over the enturies an% has gro4n tremen%ousl$ in ountries suh as the >nglan%/ *nite% States of meria/ an% other ,rogressive ountries an% to a ertain eItent in +n%ia.
Indian scenario +n +n%ia the term tort has been in eIistene sine ,re=in%e,en%ene era. The Sans6rit 4or% imha 2/ 4hih means roo6e% 4as use% in anient :in%u la42 teIt in the sense of tortuous of frau%ulent on%ut. )ost of +n%ian tort la4 4as %evelo,e% after the British oloniKation 2". The la4 of torts as a%ministere% in +n%ia in mo%ern times is the >nglish la4 as foun% suitable to +n%ian on%itions an% as mo%ifie% b$ ts of the +n%ian -egislature 29.The la4 of torts or ivil 4rongs in +n%ia is thus almost 4holl$ the >nglish la4/ 4hih is a%ministere% as rules of 7ustie/ euit$ an% goo% onsiene. *n%er the 2! A8 /'8/8 / 7 / 3== 9/?= / ''73 3=73,8; 7;7 '89'7 / ?7 =,= ?3= /77/ @ 7/ 9/?=3 ,8 9 =, 37 7;7 33?3. +/ G'7# /89 =, C7/8 S?' C/?= 9 =,= '7/@3 @ 8 '7/@ ,/ 73 ?; =3= 9?3 / ,3 ?3 / 97 >?8# 77 7/ 9/?=3 8 C7/8 ?3= /77/ =,3 ?7# 9/877 7 9=/8@# C/877 7 39,//7 25 D4 H M// Law(makers) o" the land 26 N riyanath sen (H8? J?3'?89) 2" M,? 3,# Codi;ed %indu Law* Myth and $eality* 2%K$$ E9/8/9 8 /7=97 7@ 21!5(1%%!)#
2& F7 J3 L3/8# $eligion and
2% F7 J3 L3/8# $eligion and
:in%u la4 an% the )uslim la4/ tort ha% a muh narro4er one,tion than the tort of the >nglish la4. The ,unishment of rimes in these s$stems ou,ie% a more ,rominent ,lae than om,ensation for 4rongs. The la4 of torts in +n%ia ,resentl$/ is mainl$ the >nglish la4 of torts 4hih itself is base% on the ,rini,les of the ommon la4 of >nglan%.38
Torts law in India
During British rule/ ourts in +n%ia 4ere en7oine% b$ ts of @arliament in the *5 an% b$ +n%ian enatments to at aor%ing to 7ustie/ euit$ an% goo% onsiene if there 4as no s,eifi rule of enate% la4 a,,liable to the %is,ute in a suit 31. +n regar% to suits for %amages for torts/ ourts follo4e% the >nglish ommon la4 insofar as it 4as onsonant 4ith 7ustie/ euit$ an% goo% onsiene. The$ %e,arte% from it 4hen an$ of its rules a,,eare% unreasonable an% unsuitable to +n%ian on%itions. n >nglish statute %ealing 4ith tort la4 is not b$ its o4n fore a,,liable to +n%ia but ma$ be follo4e% here unless it is not ae,te% for the reason 7ust mentione%. The +n%ian ourts before a,,l$ing an$ rule of >nglish la4 an see 4hether it is suite% to the +n%ian soiet$ an% irumstanes. The a,,liation of the >nglish la4 in +n%ia has therefore been a seletive a,,liation. This fat is uite a,,reiate% beause $0 S=4 R?3377 !rie" history o" 'ndians * torts and 9nglish common law $1 S=4 R?3377 !rie" history o" 'ndians * torts and 9nglish common law 12
there is a %ifferene in the soieties an% s$stems of Britain an% +n%ia tort la4 is not o%ifie% in +n%ia. This means 4henever an eIigen$ arises/ a ,ree%ent shall be set u, to ta6e are of the ,euliar situation. During British rule/ ourts in +n%ia 4ere en7oine% b$ ts of @arliament in the *5 32 an% b$ +n%ian enatments to at aor%ing to 7ustie/ euit$ an% goo% onsiene if there 4as no s,eifi rule of enate% la4 a,,liable to the %is,ute in a suit. +n regar% to suits for %amages for torts/ ourts follo4e% the >nglish ommon la4 in so far as it 4as onsonant 4ith 7ustie/ euit$ an% goo% onsiene. The$ %e,arte% from it 4hen an$ of its rules a,,eare% unreasonable an% unsuitable to +n%ian on%itions. n >nglish statute %ealing 4ith tort la4 is not b$ its o4n fore a,,liable to +n%ia but ma$ be follo4e% here unless it is not ae,te% for the reason 7ust mentione%. There has been a ,ressing nee% in +n%ia to reform %ifferent setors of la4 an% torts 4hih ontinues to be ignore% for a variet$ of reasons in +n%ia li6e L I. II.
i!" liti!ation cost #t"us t"e common man is discoura!ed to !o to court$ T"e amount of time ta%en &' t"e (udiciar' in awardin! compensation is not wort" waitin! for.
III.
)en of provisions of tort law are covered in C*C and CR*C so t"e ones uncovered are not properl' ruled on &' t"e (ud!es in courts. ++
$2 S=4 R?3377 !rie" history o" 'ndians * torts and 9nglish common law $$ , C/ / C87 /9?# 1%"$ (C9),==':KK.478/1.9/K9=3K9'9K=,-9//-987-'/9?-1%"$-9'9-28-';.,=7$5"O=/'@9/'83=/8
1$
Tort is the ,art of la4 4here res,onse to a ,ersonal or ivil 4rong or in7ur$ 4here the ourts ,rovi%e in tort la4 it believe% that b$ giving the reme%$ the ourt is restoring the vitim to his or her former state before the tort too6 ,lae Miven that in +n%ia it 4as believe% that even if the onstitution %oesnGt ,artiularl$ o%ifies tort la4 the other o%e li6e C@C3 an% CR@C3! 4oul% be able to over the ivil 4rongs an% ,rovi%e 7ustie has faile% no4 the state of ivil ases relate% to tort in +n%ian ourts are in shambles. Tort la4 is onsi%ere% to be the %evelo,ment of an ol% maIim ubi 7us ibi reme%ium 3 (>ver$ right nee%s a Reme%$.*n%erstan% of this un%er%evelo,ment regar%ing a %ee,=seate% uestion in almost all s$stems of la4 is that ho4 to ma6e a 4rong%oer aountable in +n%ia 4here for e.g. in a tort li6e negligene nobo%$ ever fin%s out 4ho ommitte% the tort an% onl$ some lu6$ ,laintiffs an fin% a solvent %efen%ant/ @. S. ti$ah has alle% this situation as a H%amages lotter$3.
$! HE CODE O+ CI*IL ROCEDURE# 1%0& ,==':KK9,373.;/4.8K;,=8?K9=K'K9/947.'
$5 S=@ 3,# CRC 39=/8 /'83 //3 / == 9/'83=/8 %industan imes (N D7,# J?8 10# 2010)
$6 OG/ ?843=@ '33 ubi 7us ibi remedium $". S. A=@, he Damages Lottery 1!
Certainl$/ some of the features of the la4 of torts are 4hih 4ere %evelo,e% in >nglan% are absent in +n%ia. The +n%ian ourts therefore/ a,,l$ those ,rini,les to math the situations in +n%ia. This means there is an alteration from the British la4 to suit the +n%ian on%itions. This fat is uite a,,reiate% beause there is a %ifferene in the soieties an% s$stems of Britain an% +n%ia tort la4 is not o%ifie% in +n%ia. This means 4henever an eIigen$ arises/ a ,ree%ent shall be set u, to ta6e Care of the ,euliar situation. This %efinitel$ is a goo% solution to o,e u, 4ith ivil matters in the largest %emora$ on the ,lanet. +t has also been note% in the *nion Carbi%e Case/ that Setion 9 of the Co%e of Civil @roe%ure3"/ 4hih enables a Civil Court to tr$ all suits of a ivil Nature/ im,lie%l$ onfers 7uris%ition to a,,l$ the la4 of torts as ,rini,les of 7ustie/ euit$ an% Moo% onsiene. This %efinitel$ is/ ,rovi%ing a forum to tr$ ivil 4rongs an% ma6ing them a misellaneous ategor$. This ,rovi%es the ourts 4ith a 4i%e arra$ of 7uris%ition. Nuisane39/ Negligene8/ et. are 4rongs of a %ifferent nature. +t is %efinitel$ agree% that the sim,ler torts nee% :ighlighting/ but the ,roblem again remains the same. To overome the same there shoul% be ourts s,eifiall$ set for these small offenes or even bigger ones/ of ivil nature. The 7u%iial ativism1 4hih has been ,resent in ertain ases li6e the *CC Case2/ or the Nilabati Behera3 ase/ is t$,ial eIam,les of %evelo,ment in onstitutional tort. This outloo6 has ,rofoun%l$ influene% the %iretion 4hih tort la4 has ta6en.
$& C47 '/9? 9/# 3 %,==':KK/@,;,9/?=.89.8K=K/;87K2012KA21512020512.'
$% M 3= /878 3/?9 201$# N?389 !0 3 N;7;89 ' S 8 R3 I'3 L/P?=?: 338; C/?383. +/3= L R4 [200%] !1 C,3=/', /7# #udicial activism # R/8 L==77 !2 =nion Carbide Cororation Ltd. vs. =nion " 'ndia (=oi) [1%%!] (!) SCALE %"$ !$ Smt >ilabati !ehra aliaslalit v state o" rissa [1%%$] SCR (2) 5&1 15
The one,t of sovereign immunit$ has been aIe%E the viarious liabilit$ of the state one,t has been reogniKe% in several ases. :eneforth/ it is ver$ muh evi%ent that the magnum of the 4rong/ the ,arties involve%/ an% the gravit$ of the situation has %ei%e% (an% ontinue to %o so the %elivering of 7u%gments relating to torts. This fat sho4s that the 7u%iiar$ is in fat/ ative on setting ,ree%ents on tort la4. There has been a sattere% arra$ of ats an% statutes relating to %ifferent 6in%s of tort/ li6e the )otor 0ehiles t/ 19"" (it 4as also enate% in late "8s an% ater @ollution t!/ ir @ollution t et. The >nvironment @rotetion also ame u,/ as late as 19"/ as an after effet of the Bho,al Mas Trage%$. lan% mar6 ase nee%s mention here/ beause of the ,rogressive a,,roah of the +n%ian u%iiar$ in this regar%. more stringent rule of strit liabilit$ than the rule then the rule in R$lan%s v. &lether " 4as lai% %o4n b$ the Su,reme Court in ).C.)ehta v. *nion of +n%ia9.
!! HE MOOR *EHICLES AC# 1%&& M83=@ / / 8 ,;,@ (5% O+ 1%&&)
!5 HE AER (RE*ENION AND CONROL O+ OLLUION) AC 1%"!# =, 98=7 8 3== /3 / '48=/8 8 9/8=/7 / = '/77?=/8. !6 HE AIR (RE*ENION AND CONROL O+ OLLUION) AC 1%&1# 3 (1!)# M83=@ / 84/88= 8 /3=# F/488= / I8
!" , E84/88=7 '/=9=/8 A9= 1%&6# M83=@ / 84/88= 8 /3=. !& $ylands v 0letcher [1&6&] UHL 1 !% M.C. Mehta &nd &nr vs. =nion " 'ndia ? rs [1%&6]# [1%&"] AIR 10&6 16
The Court gave the reasoning that the ol% rule of the ommon la4 %i% not meet the mo%ern tehniues of siene an% in%ustrial soiet$.There is a nee% to %e,art from that rule 4hereb$ the in%ustries ought to be a4are of their res,onsibilit$/ if the$ are ta6ing benefit out some haKar%ous business. This a,,roah of the Su,reme Court learl$ sho4s that there is no nee% for a settle% or a mo%el tort la4 struture in +n%ia. +ts so=alle% branhes are no4 assuming %ifferent %imensions. ,lethora of %ebates an% agitations 4ere unleashe% after the Bho,al Mas Trage%$ an% >nvironmental legislations ame in. The ruI remains the there has been an im,ortane given to the issues of global im,ortane li6e environment ,rotetion/ 4hih also fin%s a ,lae in the la4 of tort. ssault !8/ batter$!1 et. are smaller torts an% there have been ,rovisions
inor,orate%
for
them
either
in
the
C@C
or
the
CR@C.
Thus/ there is no nee% for a s,eifi legislation %ealing 4ith Suh small ivil 4rongs/ but there is ertainl$ a nee% for the bigger ones beause in a ountr$ li6e +n%ia 4here the bureaura$ is ver$ orru,t it is the bigger offen%ers li6e arren n%erson 4ho get a4a$ easil$ in the Bho,al gas trage%$ ase!2.
nother thing/ 4hih nee%s highlighting at this 7unture/ is the Consumer @rotetion t!3/ in +n%ia. +t has assume% a %ifferent 7uris,ru%ene altogether an% has beome a %ifferent stream in itself. +t also ,rovi%es for tr$ing of me%ial negligene ases before a onsumer ourt or forum. +t +s a vitaliKing ,oint again/ that sine it has assume% a stature an% that of a ver$ high %egree/ it has beome im,ortant. n% to the eItent that a legislation 4as in%ee% enate% for the same. This &at learl$ sho4s that the legislature has the intent an% %esire to im,rove the situation of tort la4 in +n%ia an% o%if$ing the la4 4oul% be the neIt logial ste,. The la4 on nuisane! %oes ,rovi%e for ,ubli nuisane an% ,rivate nuisane. 50 M 3= /878 3/?9 , 9 / =@8; / =,=88; =/ ==9 3//8 ',@3977@ 51 B79Q3 L D9=/8@ F8# '. 162 52 State o" Madhya
5! , 883@748 S== U843=@# , D983/8 S9,//7 / L * uisance Law#,==':KK7.'3?.?K7K;7K883@748N?389L.' 1"
+t has to be Continuous to bring u, a laim. @rivate nuisane an be onsi%ere% 4hen there has been a Substantial nuisane an% unreasonable interferene. Bringing on laims merel$ on or%inar$ Disomforts 4oul% %efinitel$ be a futile litigation an% it 4oul% overloo6 the ,ratialities of life. #n this groun% it 4oul% be uite 4rong to sa$ that torts are being overloo6e%. +t must be note% that the ourt/ 4hile inter,reting S.133!! of the CR@C has in%ee% allo4e% ,rivate laims as 4ell. The ourt %i% sa$ that the language use% b$ the sai% setion %oes not neessaril$ mean ,ubli or @rivate nuisane.! No4/ 4ith referene to nuisane/ there has been a lear %istintion via several ases bet4een/ >nvironmental nuisane an% tort nuisane. No4/ nuisane has been given/ a more riminal tilt to it. +t is evi%ent that the reme%$ ,rovi%e% in the CR@C or the +@C/ has been effetivel$ eIhauste%. The lassi eIa m,le being/ the Ratlam )unii,alit$ Case!. hen it omes to nuisane an% as a Civil 4rong (,rivate nuisane to be more s,eifi/ reme%ies available are sare/ an% the in7ure% @arties are often %isintereste%. The tort litigation in +n%ia is no4here as om,are% 4ith that of the *.S. or for that matter/ the ountr$ 4hih has given +n%ia its uno%ifie% tort la4/ Britain. There is a ,ro,er 7ur$ in ertain ases of %efamation in >nglan%/ 4hile in +n%iaE it is not ta6en too seriousl$. Defamation !"has been ma%e a riminal at too. The s$stem in >nglan% is uite %ifferent &rom +n%ia. The$ run on ,ree%ents. Thus it 4oul% be 4ise to ut %o4n the ourt fee to ,,reiate more legislation/ rather than giving muh im,ortane to the la4 of tort. The %evelo,ment of tort la4 is evi%ent in the la4 relating to nuisane as 4ell. @rini,les/ suh as the ,olluter ,a$s ,rini,le are no4 being ae,te% through various 7u%iial ,ronounements in +n%ia. There has been a 4i%e ae,tane of ases going to the Su,reme Court via 4rit ,etitions or @ubli interest litigations. This is a more effetive an% eI,e%itious reme%$ing available. :o4 often it has been seen/
55 , C/ O C87 /9?# 1%"$ 3(1$$)I88 8//8 #,==':KK888//8./;K/9K%&$$&2K
56 M 3= /878 3/?9 201$# 4= 8?389 5" Municial Council* $atlam vs. Vardichan &nd rs [1%&0] 5& A34 S8;, D=/8 73: I=3 P?3=/8 / ,/8/? he 'ndian 9:ress [200&]
1&
that the Su,reme Court has a%mitte% 4rit ,etitions un%er rtile 32 !9 of the Constitution of +n%ia. The ourts have a4ar%e% om,ensation in suh ases as 4ell. Thus/ the Courts have trie% to ,rovi%e an effetive forum an% metho% to the itiKens. @roblems use% to be the ,rerogative of the State @ollution Control Boar%. +t 4as u,on the Boar% to a,,roah the ourt. The situation has hange% no4. The Courts have reogniKe% itiKen suits in suh matters too/ thus o,ening a ne4 4a$ for the ommon )en to a,,roah the ourts8. nother reason 4h$ the Su,reme Court has beome a reme%$ ,rovi%er is that/ there are ver$ fe4 ,roblems of lous stan%i 1. )ost of the ases have been %is,ense% off in a ver$ tatful an% 7ustifiable manner.
5% , C/83==?=/8 O I8 1%!%# A$2# L 83=@ F/488= / I8 78.89.8K7;37=4KA=1-2!220(1-&&)./9
60 CONSUMER ROECION AC# 1%&6# S== 7;7 349 ?=,/=@,==':KK9,373.;/4.8K;,=8?K9=K'K9/83?.'
61 M 3= 9=/8@# 7/9?3 3=8- ;,= =/ '' 8 9/?= / / 8@/@ /8 ;48 P?3=/8 ' ;,= =/ ,# ,==':KK.-3=.9/K9=/8@K7/9?3 203=8
1%
Ta6ing about om,ensation/ Setion 3!(12 of the CR@C ,ermits a ourt/ 4hile sentening an ause% to fine/ to a4ar% om,ensation out of the fine to an$ ,erson for loss or in7ur$ ause% b$ the offene 4hen om,ensation is in the o,inion of the ourt/ reoverable b$ suh ,erson in a Civil suit. &urther/ Setion 3! (33 ,rovi%es that a ourt an as6 the ause% (a,art from the fine to in%emnif$ the vitim/ b$ 4a$ of om,ensation. The ,oint is that/ the ourts an% the legal S$stem %oes ,rovi%e for alternative reme%ies an% a 4i%e range of reme%ies. Then 4h$ is there a Nee% to give im,ortane to tort/ as a single entit$ There is also a ,rovision for in7untion in the Co%e of Civil @roe%ure as 4ell as the S,eifi Relief t. n in7untion is an or%er of a ourt restraining the ommission/ re,etition/ or Continuane of a 4rongful at of the %efen%ant. n in7untion ma$ be grante% to ,revent 4aste/ tres,ass/ or the ontinuane of nuisane to %4elling or business houses/ to right of su,,ort/ to Right of 4a$/ to high4a$s/ to ferries/ to mar6ets et. Thus there is a mehanism available to sort out or loo6 in to trifles as 4ell. These small torts an also be ta6en are of/ b$ the t4o ts.
62 , C/ / C87 /9?# 1%"$ (C9) 478/7.9/,==':KK.478/1.9/K9=3K9'9K=,-9/-/-987-'/9?-1%"$-9'928-';.,=7$5"O=/'@9/'83=/8
6$ S=@ 3, # CRC 39=/8 /'83 //3 / == 9/'83=/8 %industan imes (N D7,# J?8 10# 2010)
6! C; 9=/8@ /878 ,==':KK9=/8@.9;./;K9=/8@K=3,K8>?89=/8 20
)entione% above. The S,eifi Relief t! also ,rovi%es for restitution of ,ro,ert$. Thus a ,erson 4ho is 4rongfull$ %is,ose% of immovable ,ro,ert$ or of s,eifi movable ,ro,ert$ is entitle% to reover the immovable or movable ,ro,ert$/ as the ase ma$ be. ll these eIam,les eIhibit a i%e range of legal issues an% their reme%ies that are in%ee% available in the ,roe%ural (as 4ell s substantive la4s of this ountr$. No4/ oming to the la4 relating to %efamation in +n%ia/ there is a %iversion from Britain. The Common la4 rule that slan%er is not ationable ,er se has not been follo4e% in +n%ia/ eIe,t in a &e4 %eisions. The reason given is that the rule is not foun%e% on an$ obvious reason or ,rini,le/ an% that it is not onsonant 4ith 7ustie/ euit$ an% goo% onsiene. Both libel an% Slen%er are riminal offenes un%er Se. 99 of the +n%ian @enal Co%e an% both are ationable 4ithout ,roof of s,eial %amage. Thus/ there is an o,tion available for %efamation in +n%ia/ to go for a ivil reme%$ or a riminal one. This again eIem,lifies the ease 4ith 4hih the 7u%iiar$ has mol%e% the %ifferent branhes of tort la4 in to the +n%ian legal s$stem.
65 HE SECI+IC RELIE+ AC# 1%6$ AC NO. !" O+ 1%6$- C,8;, 3=9= 9/?= ,==':KK9,3=9=9/?=3.;/4.8KHE20SECI+IC20RELIE+20AC.'
66 , I88 87 C/# 1&60 3 (!%%),==':KK.888//8./;K/9K10!1"!2K
21
NEED ,OR RE,OR)IN- AND CODI,IN- TORT /A0 IN INDIA
+f ever there 4as a ountr$ 4ith a om,elling ase for a om,rehensive an% %etaile% tort la4 it is +n%ia. The lessons learnt from Bho,al have $et to be effete%. The loss of lives ause% b$ the ini%ent is atastro,hi es,eiall$ onsi%ering the ri,,ling nature of the same that left generations %isease% an% enfeeble%. But 4hat om,oun%s this loss/ in a most offensive an% %emeaning fashion is the om,ensation Oa4ar%e%G. s a result of a s$stem that la6e% the eI,ertise to fae 4hat 4oul% ultimatel$ beome the most om,leI litigation of its 6in%/ the Movernment ,asse% the @roessing of Claims tthat invo6e% the @arens @atriae %otrine" to allo4 itself to re,resent the vitims. This move itself 4as fraught 4ith ina%euaies onerning vitim ,rofiling an% an overtl$ sim,listi gra%ation of vitims. n% the vitims %i%nGt reeive ,ro,er om,ensations. )ore so beause Su,reme Court ha% su,erfiiall$ %etermine% the a4ar% of om,ensation. This is vali%ate% in ,art b$ the fat that the sheme of om,ensation an% the 4is%om behin% the 7u%gment ha% to be eI,laine% b$ the Movernment of +n%ia in an offiial statement. hile this %isaster ,rom,te% a number of legislations/ the la4 of torts 4as ons,iuousl$ ignore%. s a result +n%ia stan%s 7u%iiall$ unable to litigate ma7or tort laims from large sale in%ustrial ai%ents. n% even after suh a atastro,he still ,eo,le in +n%ia are not a4are about their ivil rights infringements an% still the$ are relutant to go to ourts for reasons ,revailing %ue to la6 of reform in tort la4 in +n%ia li6e var$ing trial ost in ivil suits in +n%ian ourts /the more high ,rofile ases are treate% ,ro,erl$ as o,,ose% to lo4 ,rofile ases/ limits on ,unitive %amages 4hih are generall$ ver$
6" B,/'7 F3 7 D33=(R;3==/8 8 '/9338; / 973)9,97 [1%&5] 6& C/877 /878 9=/8@# , '/ / =, 3== =/ 9= 3 ;?8 / =,/3 ,/ ?87 =/ 9 / =,3743# 3?9, 3 9,78 / 37 84?73. +/ G'7# ?8 =,3 /9=8 >?; @ 9,8; 9?3=/@# 9,7 3?''/=# / /=, ?78;3 9=8; 9,7Q3 77-8;# ;733 / ,= =, '8=3 @ ,4 ; =/ 22
lo4 in om,arison 4ith similar ases in other ountries so in or%er to %eal suh ,roblems there have to be legislative reforms in or%er to o%if$ an% ,romote a4areness about tort la4 in +n%ia.
S*ECIA/ CASE ANA/SIS
1O*A/ -AS TRA-ED
The gas lea6 roun% mi%night on Sun%a$/ 2 Deember 19"/ 4hile most of +n%ia sle,t/ a large number of the resi%ents of Bho,al/ a to4n in the entral +n%ian state of )a%h$a @ra%esh 4ith a ,o,ulation of nearl$ a million/ 4ere ,ut to %eath as meth$l iso$anate ()+C/ a toIi gas use% in the @re,aration of ,estii%es/ 4hih ha% esa,e% from one of the tan6s of a nearb$ *nion Carbi%e ,lant/ re,t over them9. The eIat number of ,eo,le affete% b$ this 'ai%ent' remains un6no4n/ but three $ears later the %eath toll stoo%/ on offiial ount/ at 3/!88/ though other estimates of @eo,le 6ille% outright/ or as a onseuene of the gas lea6/ run to as high as 18/888E ,erha,s as man$ as 8/888 ,eo,le 4ere ,ermanentl$ %isable%/ maime%/ or ren%ere% sub7et to numerous grave illnesses/ an% another 288/888=388/888 foun% themselves 4ith minor in7uries/ 4ithout obs/ or im,overishe% b$ the %eath of the onl$ brea%= 4inner in the famil$8. Cassels/ a ,rofessor of la4 at the *niversit$ of 0itoria/ reounts us for the Tortuous ,ath of litigation that eventuall$ le%/ on 1 &ebruar$ 19"9/ to a settlement bet4een the Movernment of +n%ia an% *nion Carbi%e bro6ere% b$ the Su,reme Court1/ an agreement that ,,eare% 6% M83 ,3=/@ 8 '/7=93# ,==':KK.3398=.?97.?K3/?=,3KH3=/@KC?8=A3KB,/'78'8.,=7 "0 I "1 S B,/'7# ,==':KK.?9P7.9/.?K9/?8=@K,/'7 2$
to give the message Hthat human life in +n%ia is hea,H (,. 2!. s he ,oints out/ ne4s of the gas lea6 ha% barel$ ma%e its 4a$ into ,rint before la4$ers s4ung into ation. *nion Carbi%e/ no %oubt antii,ating litigation/ forbi%s its em,lo$ees from s,ea6ing to the ,ress/ an% at #ne retaine% ,rominent +n%ian attorne$s/ inlu%ing Nani @al6hivala/ the former +n%ian mbassa%or to the *.S. #n Deember th/ the 4ell=6no4n merian la4$er/ )elvin Belli/ harateriKing himself as Ha goo% a,italistH/ file% a P1!=billion lass ation suit in an merian ourt on behalf of some vitims/ an% t4o %a$s later ohn Coale/ a ashington attorne$/ beame the first merian la4$er to arrive in +n%ia2. :e got himself hire% as the it$'s la4$er after meeting 4ith the ma$or Bho,al/ an% imme%iatel$ reruite% loal labor in or%er to gain lients. The sal,s of +n%ians (the HotherH +n%ians/ merian la4$ers assi%uousl$ began to engage in bount$= hunting. The H,rofit motiveH ha% Hbrought to the %oorste,s of the im,overishe% ,eo,le of +n%ia some of the finest legal talent in meriaH/ a6no4le%ge% one merian observer (,. 11!/ as though to suggest that the ,eo,le of Bho,al/ largel$ illiterate an% ,overt$=stri6en/ shoul% have felt honore% in%ee% blesse% at the %esent u,on their it$ of a ,a6 of 4olves. 3 Survivors 4hose laims ma$ have been 4rongl$ %ismisse% or 4ho 4ere un%er,ai% 4ere %irete% b$ the ourt to file a se,arate a,,liation/ an% see6 om,ensation from the Movernment of +n%ia. The average ,a$out 4ill still onl$ amount to P!8 ,er ,erson 4hih/ %es,ite Do4=Carbi%e's no4 &amous %itum that FP!88 is ,lent$ goo% for an +n%ianH/ omes no4here near meeting the osts #f me%ial treatment that survivors have alrea%$ ha% to fun% for themselves/ muh less om,ensating for t4o %ea%es of illness/ loss of livelihoo% an% fear for 4hat ne4 horrors ma$ >merge in their bo%ies. +t is a further setba6 for the Do4=Carbi%e Cor,oration an% its ,olitial aom,lies in +n%ia/ ho are on reor% as %eman%ing that this mone$/ meant for the relief of the survivors/ shoul% be use% to lean u, the om,an$'s aban%one% an% ,ollute% fator$ in Bho,al. -ast month/ the Movernment of +n%ia thre4 its 4eight behin% a ourt ation to fore Do4=Carbi%e to bear the full Costs of leaning the ,lant!
2ustice deliver' "2 NR M,4 M8/8# Documents and inions on the !hoal @as leak Disaster # NLSIU (1%%1) "$ NR M,4 M8/8# Documents and inions on the !hoal @as leak Disaster # NLSIU [1%%1] "! , B,/'7 F3 L D33= (/9338; / C73) A9=# 1%&5 2!
&irst of all/ the %eision attrats severe ritiism on one basis that is the ignorane of ,resent Cirumstanes an% later effets of the ai%ent. +t is a ,rini,le of tort la4 that 4hile onsi%ering The harm %one/ all the in7uries ourre% 4hih are %iret result of the harm
"5 I8 U8/8 C C/'. F3 78= D33= = B,/'7 I8 8 D9. [1%&!]# 6$! +. S?''. &!2 (S.D.N.Y. 1%&6).
"6 , B,/'7 C3# I88 L I83==?= (B/@# 1%%0)# BG# U'8 8 A= D,8# *78= *9=3 8 L=,7 L=;=/8. "" NR M,4 M8/8# Documents and inions on the !hoal @as leak Disaster # NLSIU [1%%1] 25
fourteen $ears ago but it 4as mainl$ %ue to la6 of ,unitive ,rovisions in the +n%ian legal s$stem that the ul,rits 4ere able to get a4a$ s easil$ an% lightl$ after ommitting suh a big 4rong." n$one 4ith a basi 6no4le%ge of la4 oul% have 6no4n/ as earl$ as in 199/ that the sale of ustie has been %eisivel$ tilte% in favor of the ause% %ue to la6 of ,ro,er ,rovisions to tortuous %ee%s. +n 19"/ the CB+ ha% harge% 12 ,eo,le 4ith Hul,able homii%eH un%er Setion 38=++ of +@C9/ a Charge arr$ing a ten=$ear 7ail term. +n Se,tember 199/ a benh om,rising Chief ustie ) hme%i an% ustie SB )a7um%ar uashe% these harges an% %irete% the CB+ to %ilute them to HDeath b$ negligeneH un%er Setion 38="8 4ith a maIimum of t4o $ears 7ail term. The %ie 4as ast. The guilt$ men of Bho,al ha% virtuall$ 4on the legal battle in 199"1. n% no4 their tatis/ ba6e% u, b$ some the best legal brains in the ountr$/ 4as to ,rolong the fight for as long as @ossible. +nitiall$ nobo%$ 6ne4 4hat ha% ha,,ene% in Bho,al. -ater the ne4s filtere% through/ that 8 Tones of a 6iller gas/ meth$l iso$nate/ ha% lea6e% from a ,oorl$ maintaine% tan6 in the *nion Carbi%e ,lant. +nitial re,orts suggeste% that a %isgruntle% em,lo$ee ha% intentionall$ %one it b$ ,ushing a ta, of running 4ater into the meth$l iso$nate tan6. #bviousl$/ this 4as one of the man$ false re,orts being irulate% to shift the blame a4a$ from om,an$ management."2 The final %eath toll reahe% u, to 2!/888 an% hun%re%s of thousan%s ontinue% to suffer from Breathing an% lungs ailments/ birth %eformities an% ,h$sial an% ,s$hologial trauma. "3
"& "% BG# U'8 8 A= D,8# *78= *9=3 8 L=,7 L=;=/8. , B,/'7 C3# I88 L I83==?= (B/@# 1%%0). &0 S B,/'7# ,==':KK.?9P7.9/.?K9/?8=@K,/'7 &1 I &2 S B,/'7# ,==':KK.?9P7.9/.?K9/?8=@K,/'7 (73= 43= A?;?3= 2"# 200") &$ M,4 M8/8# Documents and inions on the !hoal @as leak Disaster # NLSIU [1%%1] 26
So it is 6no4n that that 7ustie hme%i an% ustie )a7um%ar %i% a great favor to 5asha )ahin%ra an% other +n%ian bosses of the *C+-/ but it 4asnGt entirel$ their mista6e it 4as a grave mista6e o n ,art of +n%ian legislation from 4hih it hasnGt learnt still an% even to%a$ +n%iaOs 7u%iiar$ ,ro,erl$ eui,,e% 4ith legal ,rovisions to %eal 4ith in%ustrial %isaster ases li6e the Bho,al gas trage%$.
U*AAR CINE)A ,IRE
The *,haar inema in Mreen @ar6 4as built in 193. #n une 13/ 199/ it 4as sho4ing the movie Bor%er/ 4hen a generator aught fire imme%iatel$ after the intermission. The au%iene Notie% smo6e oming out from the si%e of the sreen/ but most ,eo,le thought it 4as a Hs,eial >ffetH %evie that 4as ,art of the movie. B$ the time the$ realiKe% that a fire ha% bro6en/ it 4as too late. The ma7orit$ of those 4ho 4ere tra,,e% insi%e the hall %ie% in a stam,e%e or as a result #f as,h$Iiation. &ift$=nine ,eo,le/ 4ho inlu%e% infants an% hil%ren/ lost their lives an% 183 Sustaine% in7uries." The %isaster sho6e% Delhi. The ssoiation of 0itims of *,haar Trage%$ (0*T "!4as forme% B$ 38 families 4hose members ha% been 6ille% or in7ure%. Sai% 0*T member Naveen Sahani; He 4ere seething 4ith anger. The assoiation beame something li6e a famil$/ beause + 6ne4 4hat 4as ha,,ening insi%e the other ,ersonGs min%/ an% he 6ne4 ho4 + 4as suffering.H Sahani -ost his %aughter/ Tari6a/ at that time a 21=$ear=ol% final $ear %egree stu%ent of esus an% )ar$ College. or%ing to Sahani/ an a%vertisement in a ne4s,a,er s,ar6e% off 4hat evolve% into a )ovement. HThree or four %a$s after the ini%ent/ one of the ause% too6 out an a%vertisement Sa$ing the$ 4ere not res,onsible for the trage%$. This brought us together in outrage/H he sai%. 5.T.S. Tulsi/ the la4$er/ fought the ase for the vitims 4ithout harging an$ fees. )embers of the 0*T atten%e% the ourt hearings s,rea% over 13 %a$s. The$ organiKe% %isussions an% Debates in Delhi on issues ranging from environmental ,rotetion to governmental aountabilit$ in ,ub li affairs.
&!=haar ragedy ... vs. =nion " 'ndia (=oi) A338. O *9=3# [2! A'7# 200$]# [200$] IIIAD D7, $21 &5 C3 3=?@ U', C8 =, =3 / I8 ,==':KK=3/8.8=3.9/K=973,/K21!202&!!0.93 2"
#n ,ril 2!/ %elivering its 192=,age 7u%gment/ the Delhi :igh Court a4ar%e% a om,ensation of bout Rs.1" rores to the families of the %ea% an% to the in7ure% ". (-iensing/ the )unii,al Cor,oration of Delhi ()CD an% the Delhi 0i%$ut Boar% (D0B guilt$ of giving short shrift to safet$ norms at the inema. The ourt sai% that the nsals 4oul% bear !! ,er ent of the total om,ensation amount 4hile the remaining ! ,er ent 4oul% be share% euall$ b$ the D0B/ the )CD an% the DC@ (-iensing ". The ourt sai%; H+t is our eI,eriene that the authorities inlu%ing the liensing authorit$/ the Delhi 0i%$ut Boar%/ the health authorities an% the munii,al authorities/ a%o,t a asual a,,roah in ins,eting the inemas an% other ,laes visite% b$ large numbers of ,eo,le.H "" hat ause% the smo6e to reah the balon$ 4as the flouting of buil%ing b$=la4s b$ the nsals b$ raising 4hat shoul% have been a three=foot 4all surroun%ing the generator to the eiling level. The groun%=floor ,ar6ing area 4as ma%e an enlose% area 4ith no ,rovision to let out smo6e from the a%7oining generator room. hen the generator aught fire/ burning oil from it ame in ontat 4ith ,ar6e% ars. This le% to the burning of at least 2 ars in the 7am=,a6e% ,ar6ing area/ 4hih shoul% not have a%mitte% more than 1! vehiles. Smo6e from this area ,asse% through the stair4a$ into the hall an% into the balon$ as there 4as no o,ening on the groun% floor through 4hih it oul% esa,e. "9 s there 4ere no 4ell=mar6e% eIits/ members of the au%iene oul% not esa,e in time. Not onl$ 4ere the gang4a$s narro4e% but the right=han% eIit %oor 4as ,ermanentl$ lo6e%. >mergen$ lights 4ere missing. Some of the eIit %oors 4ere lo6e%. Some ,eo,le reahe% for the toilet 4in%o4s. )ost of those 4ho 4ere as,h$Iiate% %ie% in the balon$ fo$er/ the balon$ an% the toilets as the$ turne% into virtual gas hambers. 98 The Benh im,ose% ,unitive %amages of Rs.2.! rores on the nsals for illegall$ a%%ing eItra &6 U', C8 *9= & !reakthrough 'n Comensation Law Legal View # L3 8 I8 &" && A338. O *9=3 O U', ;@ ... 43. U8/8 O I8 (U/) 2! A'7# 200$# 200$ IIIAD D7, $21 &% U', C8 *9= & !reakthrough 'n Comensation Law Legal View # L3 8 I8 %0 C3 3=?@ U', C8 =, =3 / I8 ,==':KK=3/8.8=3.9/K=973,/K21!202&!!0.93 2&
Seats/ for the$ ha% earne% eItra ,rofits b$ selling ti6ets for these seats bet4een 199 an% 199. B$ a4ar%ing %eterrent om,ensation/ the ourt set an eIam,le. +t set a ,ree%ent also in terms of The uantum of om,ensation a4ar%e%. +n alulating the amount the ourt referre% to an earlier Case relating to mass %eaths ause% b$ fire = -ata a%h4a vs. State of Bihar/ Su,reme Court Case 19. This 19"9 ini%ent too6 ,lae in a ,an%al erete% b$ the TataGs for a meeting in amshe%,ur to elebrate the 1!8th birth%a$ of amshe%7i Tata/ the foun%er of the grou,. The fire le% to the %eath of 8 ,eo,le/ 4hih inlu%e% 2! 4omen an% 2 hil%ren. -ata a%h4a lost both her hil%ren = a bo$ an% a girl = an% her ,arents in the fire. :er husban% 4as an em,lo$ee of the Com,an$. +n this ase/ Chief ustie of +n%ia Q.0. Chan%rahu% %etermine% the om,ensation mount for the %e,en%ents of the %eease% as Rs.1/ 19/ !"/328. 91 The Delhi :igh CourtGs 7u%gment is signifiant for t4o more reasons. &irst/ it has 4i%ene% the so,e for hol%ing ,ubli authorities liable to ,a$ eIem,lar$ %amages. The )CD 4as ,ulle% u, for failing to ta6e timel$ ation against illegal onstrutions. The D0B %i% not a%here to @resribe% stan%ar%s in maintaining the transformer/ 4hih 4as fault$. The 1888 50 Transformer installe% in the ,ar6ing area ha% not been ,rotete% against over=loa%/ earth fault an% >Iessive gas ,ressure. The sub=station 4as ill= maintaine%. There 4ere loose onnetions/ %amage% able insulation an% %iret onnetion 4ith lo4= tension s4ithes. The ables 4ere l$ing ha,haKar%l$ on the floor of the sub=station an% the trenhes ha% not been overe%. 92 Des,ite several %eviations from the a,,rove% arrangement insi%e the hall/ the Delhi ,olie grante% the o4ner the liense to run it. The %eviations inlu%e% ,ermanent losure of an eIit %oor to ma6e s,ae for 3 a%%itional seats an% a re%ution of the length of the gang4a$. There 4as no &ire=fighting eui,ment in the hall. @unishing ivi authorities for %erelition of %ut$ is a rare ourrene 93. B$ its or%er/ the ourt a%%e% a ne4 %imension to the la4 of torts. Seon%l$/ the 7u%gment has establishe% eualit$ before
%1U', C8 *9= & !reakthrough 'n Comensation Law Legal View # L3 8 I8 %2 I %$ I 2%
la4 for the ,ubli an% ,rivate setors. Sai% Tulsi; H+ see it as a vitor$ for the vitims over a business house an% the government. The or%inar$ vitims 4ere able to ta6e on the might of both.H 9
Ot"er famous cases3 +. ++.
5. 0en6atesh4arlu vs. )anaging Diretor/ Nagar7una9! 5e4al Chan% )imani(% b$ -rs. v S.5. Sen. an% #rs9
+++.
Bhim Singh v. State of ammu an% 5ashmir 9
+0.
Ru%al Shah v. State of Bihar 9"
0.
:ari6rishan an% State of :ar$ana v. Suhbir 99
%! C3 3=?@ U', C8 =, =3 / I8 ,==':KK=3/8.8=3.9/K=973,/K21!202&!!0.93 %5 K. Venkateshwarlu vs. Managing D9=/# N;>?8 [16 D9# 2005] I (2006) CJ !" NC %6 Kwela Chand Mimani(d) by Lrs. v S.K. Sen and rs [2001] $ SCR 1056. %" !him Singh v. State o" #ammu and Kashmir AIR [1%&6] SC !%! %& $udal Shah v. State o" !ihar AIR [1%&$] SC 10$6 %%%arikrishan and State o" %aryana v. Suhbir AIR [1%&&] SC 212"# '.21$1 $0
CONC/USION The Tort la4 in +n%ia/ has $et not been o%ifie% 4hih ma6es it %iffiult for the ,laintiff to reover the %amages. This is beause he anGt atuall$ ,rove that the in7urer is liable. So in most of the ases the in7urer esa,es easil$ b$ sa$ing that it 4as an unintentional negligene. This is atuall$ one of the main %efenses use% b$ big or,orate houses an% me%ial institutions for overing u, torts suh as negligene. hen 4e tal6 about ertain la4s regar%ing torts 4hih are overe% un%er %ifferent setions of C@C an% Cr@C of the +n%ian Constitution/ 4hih ma$ atuall$ hel, the ,laintiff reover %amages/ also anGt hel, beause ,roblems li6e high litigation ost of ivil ,roe%ures/ less ,unitive %amages et. The sole reason being/ that the$ have not been om,letel$ %evelo,e% sine the$ 4ere first ma%e an% are not auainte% 4ith the ,resent %a$ situations 4hih ma6es it eas$ for the in7urer to fin% loo,holes in the s$stem an% get a4a$ easil$. So/ beause of this 4e fin% man$ ases/ 4here right ver%its 4ere not %elivere% beause of these loo,holes an% one of the best/ rather 4e shoul% sa$ the 4orst eIam,le of this is the Bho,al Mas Trage%$ ina%euaies of our 7u%iial s$stem in %ealing 4ith ini%ents li6e these(namel$ in%ustrial %isasters
$1
