1

UNITEDWORLD SCHOOL OF LAW

NUISANCE

 PROJECT

SUBJECT: LAW OF TORT

SEMESTER 1

SUBMITTED TO:

Prof. Akhilesh Pandey SUMITTED BY:

Alisha Dargar

1
 2

Declaration

"The text reported in the project is the outcome of my own efforts and no part of this project
assignment has been copied in any unauthorized Manner and no part of it has been
incorporated without due acknowledgement"-

2
 3

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Nuisance................................................................................................................................................5
Definition:..............................................................................................................................................5
According to Salmond............................................................................................................................5
Kind of Nusiance....................................................................................................................................5
PUBLIC NUISANCE:-...............................................................................................................................6
Illustration:............................................................................................................................................6
CASE:.....................................................................................................................................................7
Dr.Ram Raj Singh...................................................................................................................................7
Vs...........................................................................................................................................................7
Babulal...................................................................................................................................................7
Bengal Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Limited and Ors.......................................................................7
Vs...........................................................................................................................................................7
Respondent: Ajit Nain and Ors..............................................................................................................7
Private Nuisance:-..................................................................................................................................9
CASE:.....................................................................................................................................................9
Radhey shyam.......................................................................................................................................9
Vs...........................................................................................................................................................9
Gur Prasad.............................................................................................................................................9
CASE:...................................................................................................................................................10
Bismillah Be (Dead) by L.Rs..................................................................................................................10
Vs.........................................................................................................................................................10
Respondent: Majeed Shah..................................................................................................................10
Elements of Private Nuisance..............................................................................................................10
WHO CAN SUE FOR NUISANCE?..........................................................................................................11
REMEDIES FOR NUISANCE...................................................................................................................11
Abatement...........................................................................................................................................11
DEFENCE IN CASES OF NUISANCE........................................................................................................12
FOLLOWING ARE NOT DEFENCE..........................................................................................................12
CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................................................13
Bibliography.........................................................................................................................................14

3
 4

AIM AND OBJECTIVE

I. To discuss (in brief) the concept of nuisance.

II. To study the subject matter nuisance and its types.
III. Discuss and analyse various case law related to Nuisance.

HYPOTHESIS

Violation of a legal right without causing any harm, loss or damage to the plaintiff.
Torts actionable without the proof of any damage
Torts which require proof for initiating action

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This project is based upon doctrinal method of research. This project has been done after a
thorough research based upon intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of the project.

Source of data:

Secondary Sources

a. Books
b. Articles

Website Mode of Citation:

4
 5

NUISANCE

Definition:

Nuisance is anything done to the hurt or annoyance of lands, tenements, or hereditaments of

another, and not amounting to a trespass.

The word ‘nuisance’ is derived from the French word nurie, to do hurt, or to annoy
Blackstone describes nuisance (nocum entum) as something that ‘worker hurt, inconvenience
or damage.

Stephen defined nuisance to be “anything done to the hurt or annoyance of lands, tenements
of another, and not amounting to a trespass.”1

According to Salmond,2 “the wrong of nuisance consists in causing or allowing without

lawful justification the escape of all deleterious thing from his land or from elsewhere into
land in passion of plaintiff.

Eg. Water, smoke, etc.3

KIND OF NUSIANCE

PUBLIC NUISANCE PRIVATE NUISANCE

PUBLIC NUISANCE:-

1
Sir J.F. Stephen ,Digest of Criminal Law , P.120
2
https://www.slideshare.net/DrVikasKhakare/tort-nuisance-77202772
3
https://www.slideshare.net/satyavrat1994/nuisance

5
 6

Public Nuisance 4generally is crime

Section 268 of the Indian Penal Code, defines it “an act or illegal omission which cause any
common injury, danger or annoyance , to the people in general who dwell, or occupy
property, in the vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or
avoidance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right.”

Public nuisance is an act affecting the public at large, or some considerable portions of it; and
it must interfere with Right which members of the community might otherwise enjoy. Thus
acts which seriously interfere with the health, safety, comfort or convenience of the public
generally or which tend to degrade public moral have always been considered public
nuisance.

Illustration:
 Ringling of bell, carrying trade which cause offensive smell or intolerable noises’,
keeping inflammable material like gunpowder in large quantity etc.

Public nuisance can only be subject of one action, otherwise a party might be ruined by a
million suits. Further, it would give rise to multiplicity of litigation resulting in burdening the
judicial system. Generally speaking, public nuisance is not a tort and thus does not give rise
to civil action. But, if plaintiff can prove that he has suffered special damage beyond which is
suffered by rest of the public, he can claim under tort.

4
Public nuisance “A person is guilty of public nuisance who does any act , or is guilty of an illegal omission,
which causes any common injury, danger or annoyance to public or the people in general Who dwell or occupy
property in vicinity or which must necessarily cause to use any public right.” Sec.268, I.P.C.

6
 7

CASE:

Dr.Ram Raj Singh

Vs.

Babulal5

In Dr.Ram Raj Singh v. Babulal, the defendant created a brick grinding machine adjoining
the premises of plaintiff, who was a medical practitioner. The brick grinding Machine
generated dust, which polluted the atmosphere. The dust entered the consulting chamber of
the plaintiff and caused physical in convenience to him and patients, and their red coating on
cloths, caused by the dust, could be apparently visible .It was held that special damages to the
plaintiff had been proved and a permanent injunction was issued against the defendant
restraining him from running his brick grinding machine there.

CASE:

Bengal Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Limited and Ors.

Vs.

Respondent: Ajit Nain and Ors.6

Appellant No. 1 is the owner of a limited Company, Government of India Enterprises known
as Bengal Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Respondent No. 1 was a lessee under
Appellant No. 1. The Appellants has submitted that, Respondent No. 1 is running a school in
the premises and Respondent No. 1 is enjoying the property for commercial purpose of
running the school since 1st June, 2014 without payment of any rent which is calculated
approximately Rs. 4.61 cores as assessed by the Estate Officer which is payable to Appellant
5
Dr.Ram Raj Singh vs. Babulal, A.I.R 1982 ALL285, AT 289.
6
Manupatra Bengal Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals Limited and Ors. Vs. Respondent: Ajit Nain and Ors. Act,
1971 - Section 2(e)

7
 8

No. 1. It was submitted that since Respondent No. 1 has not paid the rent, the Estate Officer
rightly concluded that Respondent No. 1 is an unauthorized occupant and passed the order
under Section 5(1) and Sub-section (2) and (2A) of Section 7 of the Act. It was further urged
that Respondent No. 1 has the right to file an appeal against the order passed by the Estate
Officer under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act only before the Appellate Court that is
the District Judge of the district and the writ petition filed is not maintainable. The learned
Counsel appearing for Respondent No. 1 has submitted that by taking judicial notice of the
fact of involvement of the previous Estate Officer in the eviction proceedings, the High Court
has rightly set aside the order of eviction dated 01.10.2018 passed by the Estate Officer. It
was submitted that no sufficient opportunity was afforded to Respondent No. 1 and the
quantum of damages fixed by the Estate Officer is arbitrary and therefore, Respondent No. 1
is justified in challenging the order of the Estate Officer before the High Court in the pending
appeal. Estate Officer vide order dated 1st October, 2018 passed the eviction order directing
Respondent No. 1 to vacate the premises within a week from the date of the eviction order.
High Court vide impugned order set aside the order dated 01st October, 2018 passed by the
Estate Officer and remitted the matter to the Estate Officer to consider the matter afresh in
accordance with law.

Private Nuisance7:-

Private nuisance is the using or authorizing the use of owns property ,or of anything under
one’s control, so as to injuriously affect an owner or occupier of property by physically
injuring his property or affecting its enjoyment by interfering materially with his health.
Comfort or convenience.

In contract to public nuisance, private nuisance is an act affecting some particular individual
as distinguished from the public at large. The remedy in an action for private nuisance is civil
action foe damages or an injunction or both and not an indictment.

7
Private nuisance occurs when a person conducts himself in such a fashion as to unreasonably or excessively
interfere with the private land-related rights of another. Thus, the plaintiff must be the owner or tenant of
the real property affected.

8
 9

CASE:

Radhey shyam

Vs.

Gur Prasad8

Radhey Shyam vs. Gur Prasad and another filed a suit against Radhey Shyam , and another
and other for a permanent injection to restrain them from installing and running a flour mill
in their premises, it was alleged that the said mill would cause nuisance to the plaintiffs , who
causer nuisance to the plaintiffs, who were occupying that the said mill would cause nuisance
to the plaintiffs , who were occupying the first floor portion of the same premises in as much
as the plaintiffs would lose their peace on account of rattling noise of flour mill and thereby
their health would also be adversely affected .It was held that substantial addition to the
noise in a noisy locality , by the running of the impugned machines, seriously interfered with
the physical comfort of the plaintiffs and as such, it amounted to nuisance, and the plaintiffs
Entitled to an injunction against the defendendants.

CASE:

Bismillah Be (Dead) by L.Rs.

Vs.

Respondent: Majeed Shah9

Tenancy - Eviction - Relationship of landlord and tenant - Failure to establish - Appellant

filed suit against Respondent seeking Respondent's eviction on various grounds - Trial Court
held that Appellant was not able to prove relationship of landlord and tenant with Respondent

8
Radhey Shyam vs. Gur Prasad., A.I.R 1978 All.86.
9
Bismillah Be (Dead) by L.Rs. Vs. Respondent: Majeed Shah Section 12, Madhya Pradesh Accommodation
Control Act 1961 - Section 12(1); Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 116; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
(CPC) - Section 100

9
 10

in relation to suit house - Appellant's suit was dismissed - High Court dismissed second
appeal and review petition filed by Appellant - Hence, present appeal - Whether Appellant
failed to prove his title to suit house so also relationship of landlord and tenant with
Respondent in relation to suit house.

Elements of Private Nuisance

To constitute the tort of nuisance, the following essentials are required to be

proved:

1. Unreasonable interference ;
2. Interference with the use of employment of land;
3. Damage

WHO CAN SUE FOR NUISANCE?10

Plaintiff can institute suit against-

i. Any person is liable for a nuisance who either creates or causes it, or continues its
existence or allow it to continue or who authorises its creation or continuance.
ii. Prima facie the occupier of premises is the person liable to third person for
nuisance on or arising from the premises.

REMEDIES FOR NUISANCE11

Abatement
1. Damage
2. Injunction
3. Criminal action under the provision of Indian penal code and code of criminal
procedure.

DEFENCE IN CASES OF NUISANCE12

10
DrVikasKhakare/tort-nuisance
11
https://www.slideshare.net/DrVikasKhakare/tort-nuisance-77202772
12
DrVikasKhakare/tort-nsance

10
 11

A number of defence have been pleaded in an action for nuisance. Some of defences have
been recognized by courts as valid defences and some others have been rejected. Both the
valid or effectual defence as well as ineffectual defence have been discussed below.

1. Grant: - It is valid defence to an action for nuisance that the said nuisance is under the
term of grant.
2. Prescription: - It is a special defence in cases of nuisance; if it is used peaceably and
openly enjoyed and openly as and easement and as of right without interruption and
for 20 years. This is not useful in public nuisance.
3. Statutory authority13: - If defendant has committed the act complained under Statutory
authority and all precaution required under law are compiled; he is not liable.

FOLLOWING ARE NOT DEFENCE14

 That the plaintiff himself come to nuisance.

 In case of continues nuisance, all possible care has been taken.
 Defendant merely making reasonable use or property.
 It would confer benefit to public at large.

13
Statutory authority is a body which has received power to do something as conferred by law. If someone try to
obstruct the exercise of power of this Statutory authority there is an implied threat of legal action involed.
14
DrVikasKhakare/tort-nuisance

11
 12

CONCLUSION

The law of nuisance is almost an unmodified one. Yet it has grown and expanded through
interpretation and through a plethora if judgments. The concept of nuisance is one that arises
most commonly in man’s daily life and the decision regarding the same has to be delivered
on a case to case base ensuring that neither the aggrieved plaintiff goes back uncompensated
nor the defendant is punished unnecessarily . Indian courts in the matters of nuisance have
borrowed quite intensively from the English principles as well as from the decision of the
common law system along with creating their own precedents. This has resulted in a sound
system of law being developed that ensures fairness and well-being of all i.e. the parties and
the society at large.

12
 13

13
 14

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOK REFERED

 LAW OF TORTS by R.K. Bangia

 INTRODUCTION TO THE LAW OF TORTS AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
BY

1. Avtar Singh
2. Harpreet Kaur

WEBSITE REFERED

 DrVikasKhakare/tort-nuisance
 https://www.slideshare.net/DrVikasKhakare/tort-nuisance-77202772
 https://www.manupatrafast.com/
 https://www.slideshare.net/satyavrat1994/nuisance

14