FACTS OF THE CASE

The defendant, owner of the shop has the licence for selling the vegetable and fruit used to sell only 1 kg of
onion per ration card at the time of scarcity of it. Due to which there was long queue of the buyers outside
the defendant’s shop which extended on the highway causing obstruction to the other neighbouring shops
and an action was brought against the defendant under the tort of nuisance.

The IRAC rule is applied in this case as follow:-

ISSUE

1. Whether there has been an unreasonable use of the enjoyment of property by the plaintiff?

2. Whether the act of the defendant amounts to Nuisance?

RULE:

Nuisance is the hurt or annoyance caused to a person so as to deprive him of enjoyment of his land or
property. It must be an unreasonable and unlawful act with the use of enjoyment of land. The obstruction or
hindrance to exercise any public right amounts to Public nuisance.

Essentials of Nuisance;-

1. There should be a wrongful act or omission that is the unlawful interference on the part of defendant
2. There should be some damage or inconvenience caused to another which should ne material or
substantive and not because of the sensitivity of the person.

APPLICATION:

The defendant is carrying his business of selling onions in a proper way. It was due to scarcity there was a
long queue in front of the shop of the defendant. He had the license to sell the vegetables and fruits which he
can sell lawfully. He did not created nuisance himself or did anything to cause it. He was selling the
vegetable in the licensed and appropriate quantity. The defendant cannot stop the customers from forming
the queue as there was scarcity of onions. He has not behaved in any unreasonable manner. Even if there
was an obstruction caused to the neighbouring shopkeepers, the defendant was selling the onion which is
essential for the public and was not doing it in inappropriate way to cause any annoyance to other people.
CONCLUSION:

The defendant will not be held liable for the tort of nuisance as the long queue was formed was because of
the scarcity of onion and there was no unreasonable interference with the enjoyment of the property. The
essentials of nuisance has not been fulfilled and the defendant will not be entitled to provide any damages to
the plaintiff.