Supreme Court and the High Courts, being the protectors of the civil liberties of the citizen, have not only the power and jurisdiction but also an obligation to grant relief in exercise of its jurisdiction under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution to the victim or the heir of the victim whose fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India are established to have been flagrantly infringed by calling upon the State to repair the damage done by its officers to the fundamental rights of the citizen, notwithstanding the right of the citizen to the remedy by way of a civil suit or criminal proceedings. The State, of course has the right to be indemnified by and take such action as may be available to it against the wrongdoer in accordance with law – through appropriate proceedings. Of course, relief in exercise of the power under Article 32 or 226 would be granted only once it is established that there has been an infringement of the fundamental rights of the citizen and no other form of appropriate redressal by the court in the facts and circumstances of the case, is possible.
Tortious Liability of Legal Professionals – Counsel to pay damages to their clients for breach of duty or negligence.
In England a distinction was made between barristers and other professional men and for a long time it was in usage that a barrister could not be sued by a client for […]
Title XLV TORTS Chapter 766 MEDICAL MALPRACTICE AND RELATED MATTERS 766.101 Medical review committee, immunity from liability. 766.1015 Civil immunity for members of or consultants to certain boards, committees, or other entities. 766.1016 Patient safety […]
Forwarded to the Union Minister of Law and Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India by M. Jagannadha Rao, Chairman, Law Commission of India, on ay May 11, 1956. Chairman, […]
Law of Torts requires that a trespasser may be evicted forcibly by using reasonable and appropriate force
However, the Law of Torts requires that though a trespasser may be evicted forcibly, the force used must be no greater than what is reasonable and appropriate to the occasion. One may […]
The action for damages for malicious prosecution is part of the Common Law of England. In India as in other parts of the Commonwealth like Australia the law on the subject is […]
The passage from Charlesworth on Negligence (6th Edition) page 520, para 871 states the following rule of road :- “The rule of road is that when two vehicles are approaching each other […]
The law of Torts is that it must be a case in which a private person may recover damages for loss sustained by him in consequence thereof. Whether damage is small or […]
Res ipsa loquitur is a rule of evidence which in reality belongs to the law of torts. Inference as to negligence may be drawn from proved circumstances by applying the rule if […]
In the law of negligence, professionals such as lawyers, doctors, architects and others are included in the category of persons professing some special skill or skilled persons generally. Any task which is […]
The jurisprudential concept of negligence defies any precise definition. Eminent jurists and leading judgments have assigned various meanings to negligence. The concept as has been acceptable to Indian jurisprudential thought is well-stated […]
In T.O. Anthony Vs. Karvarnan and Others, , which is relied on by the Appellants it was held as under: – Composite negligence refers to the negligence on the part of two […]
Nuisance in any form as recognized in the law of Torts-whether private, public or common which results in affecting anyone’s personnel or/and property rights gives him a cause of action/right to seek […]
The principle of law as far as the grant of compensation is well settled. Compensation for damages suffered, especially pecuniary damages suffered by a claimant is normally “actual damages”. What is the […]
Indian Courts in absence of any specific law are enjoined to decide cases “according to justice, equity and good conscience.”
The Indian Courts in the absence of any specific law are enjoined to decide cases “according to justice, equity and good conscience.” The expression “justice, equity and good conscience” has been interpreted […]
When trees on land adjoining a public place fall upon it, the owner is liable if he knew the falling tree was dangerous.
The law is stated in Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort (13th, 1989 ed., p.415) in these words : If the damage is done owing to the collapse of the projection on the […]
What is contemplated under the Motor Vehicles Act and also under the Law of Torts is that, the person who has suffered, should be legitimately and adequately compensated and such compensation should […]
Under the Law of Torts, word negligent has been defined and Word ‘negligence’ is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary (7th Edition) “The failure to exercise the standard of care that a reasonably […]
Under the law of torts, the Civil Court can award damages if civil wrong of malicious prosecution is proved.
In order to award damages the plaintiff is required to prove that the person who instituted the suit was prosecuted by the defendants in the Criminal Court. But, there is no law […]
it is clear that the respondent could not make a claim for damages. Section 53 disentitles an employee who has suffered an employment injury from receiving or recovering compensation or damages under the Workmen’s Compensation Act or any other law for the time being in force or otherwise. The use of the expression “or otherwise” would clearly indicate that this section is not limited to ousting the relief claimed only under any statute but the wordings of the section are such that an insured person would not be entitled to make a claim in Torts which has the force of law under the Employees Insurance Act. Even though the Employees Insurance Act is a beneficial legislation the Legislature Had thought it fit to prohibit an insured person from receiving or recovering compensation or damages under any other law, including Torts, in cases where the injury had been sustained by him is an employment injury.