Kinds of Nuisance for CLAT - Practice Questions & MCQ

Passage: 2

Read the following passage and answer the questions given below:

A nuisance is an interference with the use and enjoyment of another's land, if there is substantial interference an actionable nuisance results without regard to the type of conduct causing the annoyance. The word “nuisance” has been derived from the Old French word “nuire” which means “to cause harm, or to hurt, or to annoy”. The Latin word for nuisance is “nocere” which means “to cause harm”. Nuisance is an injury to the right of a person’s possession of his property to undisturbed enjoyment of it and results from an improper usage by another individual.

The act or omission is relevant only insofar as it tends to fix responsibility for the condition complained of. The elements of this condition may be catalogued as follows- First, the interference must be substantial. A nuisance to be actionable must materially impair the comfort and enjoyment of individuals or the use and value of the property "I The standard used is substantial annoyance to persons of normal and average sensibilities, and the standard does not vary because the individual is unusually sentitive or insensitive. Further, a material annoyance is an unreasonable one, and what is unreasonable varies with each set of circumstances. For example, smoke and noise that would be an unquestionable nuisance in a residential area might not be a nuisance in an industrial area. Substantial annoyance must be defined in terms of location.

Second, the interference must be physical or threaten physical injury. A violation of aesthetic values alone, e.g., by building an unsightly fence, does not result in a nuisance. The injury must be tangible or the discomfort perceptible, and the nuisance must be the proximate cause of the injury". Third, a nuisance is an injury to land, therefore the action must be brought ordinarily by the person in possession." Fourth, since the wrong is indirect, the injury must be caused by things done on the land of the defendant and not on the land of the plaintiff.'

Question : A smokes a cigarette on a busy road, then A has

Passage 4

Read the passage and answer the questions that follow.

Every person in our country is entitled to some legal right. Law imposes a duty on every individual to respect the legal right bestowed on others and any person interfering with someone else’s enjoyment of their legal right is said to have committed a tort. The underlying principle of the law of tort is that every person has certain interests which are protected by law. Any act of omission or commission which causes damage to the legally protected interest of an individual shall be considered to be a tort, the remedy for which is an action for unliquidated damages. A tort is generally a breach of duty. In India, the law of tort is uncodified and is still in the process of development. According to the principle laid down in this case the Secretary of State can be liable only for acts of non-sovereign nature, liability will not accrue for sovereign acts. But the judgment of P. and O. Steam Navigation case was differently interpreted in Secretary of State v. Hari Bhanji. In this case, it was held that if claims do not arise out of acts of State, the civil Courts could entertain them. The conflicting position before the commencement of the Constitution has been set at rest in the well-known judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati, where the driver of a jeep, owned and maintained by the State of Rajasthan for the official use of the Collector of the district, drove it rashly and negligently while taking it back from the workshop to the residence of the Collector after repairs, and knocked down a pedestrian and fatally injured him. The Supreme Court held that the State was vicariously liable for damages caused by the negligence of the driver. The decision of the Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati, Kesoram Poddar v. Secretary of State for India, introduces an important qualification on the State immunity in tort based on the doctrines of sovereign and non-sovereign functions. It decided that the immunity for State action can only be claimed if the act in question was done in the course of the exercise of sovereign functions. Then came the important case of Kasturi Lal v. State of U. P. where the Government was not held liable for the tort committed by its servant because the tort was said to have been committed by him in the course of the discharge of statutory duties. The statutory functions imposed on the employee were referable to and ultimately based on the delegation of the sovereign powers of the State. The Court held that the Government was not liable as the activity involved was a sovereign activity. There are, on the other hand, a good number of cases where the courts, although have maintained the distinction between sovereign and non-sovereign functions yet in practice have transformed their attitude holding most of the functions of the government as non-sovereign.

Question : Rohan participated in a Football match and got injured. Can Rohan sue for any damage caused to him?

What is 'Public Nuisance' ?

What are the examples of Public nuisance ?

Which case is related to 'Private Nuisance' ?