What is Trespass?

Trespass is an offense relating to a man's person or property - movable and/or immovable property. Trespass to land is also an offense under the
I.P.C. Sec. 441 provided the requisite intent is present. Trespass is an unlawful interference with the possession of property. Trespass to land of
another or any direct or immediate act of interference with the possession of land.
To constitute the offense of trespass neither force, nor unlawful is necessary. Every invasion of private property be it ever so minute, is a trespass.
Trespass may be committed:
1. By entering upon the land of the plaintiff, or
2. By remaining there, or
3. By doing an act affecting the sole possession of the plaintiff, in each case without justification.
The plaintiff must prove the following in an action for trespass:
1. That he was in actual possession of land at the time of trespass. The possession may either be rightful or wrongful.
2. That there was direct interference with the possession of his land, though actual damage need not be proved, since trespass is actionable per se.
Legal Provisions Regarding ‘Criminal Trespass’
Chapter-XVII of I.P.C. explains the provisions about the offences against property. Chapter XVII contains Sees. 378-462. Out of them, Sees. 441-
462 explain the provisions about the Criminal Trespass. Sec. 441 defines “Criminal Trespass”. Sec. 442 defines “House-trespass”. Sec. 443 defines
“Lurking House-trespass”.
Sec. 441. Criminal trespass:
Whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in
possession of such property, or, having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there with intent thereby to intimidate, insult
or annoy any such person or with intent to commit an offence is said to commit “criminal trespass”.
Important Points:
A. Ingredients:
1. The accused must have entered into or upon property in the possession of another.
2. If the wrong-doer’s entry is lawful, however, if he remains there unlawfully upon such property, it becomes criminal trespass and it becomes
trespass ab initio
3. The accused in doing criminal trespass must have intention
4. Mens rea is an essential ingredient of this offence.
B. Harish Chandra vs. State (AIR 1955 Cal. 1338)
The workers of a factory left their working place. They entered into the office of the Managing Director with deadly weapons. They raised the
slogans and beat the staff. The’ High Court held that the accused/workers were guilty of the offence criminal trespass.
Defence against trespass to body
1. Consent of Plaintiff: When plaintiff consented with the defendant on the specific act then defendant can’t be said to be trespassing if there
is a mutual understanding between the parties for the act.
2. Contributory negligence: When there is a negligence of plaintiff included in the act, then defendant’s liability can be mitigated to the extent
and compromise can be arrived at or liability can be divided.
3. Self-defence: A person, to protect himself from an unruly element or any other such person or incidents, can trespass on the property to
preclude the act from consummation. But proportionality and probability should be kept in mind while using the property of the plaintiff to
intrude and so it is to be proved by the defendant that there was no other option with the defendant other than to intrude in the property of
plaintiff.
4. Statutory authority: Authorities compelled by the law to carry out search and seizures and cases where consent is taken to conduct a
bodily search would not be construed as a trespass on the body of a person. Entry in public places and private property used for a
commercial purpose is not trespass considering the societal and public interest in mind.
5. Preservation of public peace

Distinction between Civil trespass and Criminal Trespass:

There is a clear distinction between civil and criminal trespass. Intent to commit an offence or to intimidate or insult or annoy any person in
possession of property is found in criminal trespass. These are absent in civil trespass.
1) Assault – Assault has been defined as “An attempt or offer to apply force to the person of another directly or indirectly, if the persons making the
attempt or offer causes the other to believe on reasonable grounds that he has present ability to execute his purpose[2] .It is the overt act indicating
an immediate intention to commit a battery coupled with the capacity of carrying with that intention.[3] Therefore a person can be guilty of assault
under the offence of battery but not vice versa. Assault also comes under the purview of the Indian Penal Code i.e. under section 351.
2) Battery – Battery consist of touching another person hostilely or against his will, the aim of battery is to cause grievous hurt to another person.
The landmark case of Cole V. Turner[4] laid down the principles of battery being
(i) The least touching of another in anger is battery
(ii) If two or more meet in a narrow passage and without any violence or design of harm, the one touches the other, gently, it will be no battery
(iii) If any of them use violence against the other, to force his way in a rude ordinate manner, it will be a battery ; or any struggle about the passage
to that degree as may do hurt, will be a battery. Further it had said that intention must necessarily be considered in case of battery
3) False Imprisonment – This means total restraint on a person’s liberty without any legal justification for imprisonment. This is in direct
contravention with not only common law principles but also with the constitution. It is not necessary that the plaintiff beware of the situation he is in
for example if he is in a room and asleep, if the door is locked there will be still imprisonment [5]. The most important part of this being that there
should be total restraint.
Case Laws on Trespass
Sentini Cermica P. Ltd. Vs Kunchi Krishna Mohan and Ors[1]: Statutory Authority: Search and seizure on the premises of appellant do not
constitute an act of trespass. It can’t be said that any procedure carried out to find the truth on the property will be construed to be an act of
trespass if the act is carried out with sufficient legal backing.
Amit Kapoor Vs Ramesh Chander and Anr[1]: Merely because there was a civil transaction between the parties, it would not by itself alter the
status of the allegations constituting the criminal offence.
Samira Kohli Vs. Dr. Prabha Manchanda and Anr[2]: The performance of hysterectomy and salpingo-oophorectomy on a patient was an
unauthorized invasion on her person by the doctor, and it can be deduced to be an assault and consequential battery. Her consent was required as
she was an adult and although the doctor acted in the best of patient’s interests and can be considered to be mitigating circumstances to reduce
compensation, however, in the interests of justice, the patient is entitled to the compensation.
Conclusion
It would help to uncover various facets and understand the dimensions that trespass law is clutching in its circuitous surrounding so as to loosen the
screws and solve cases and situations in an efficacious manner. The true meaning of each term needs to be understood to evaluate trespass and
resolve the cases by applying the relevant doctrines.
Negligence as A Tort: Meaning Essentials and Defences
I. MEANING: In everyday usage, the word ‘negligence’ denotes mere carelessness. In legal sense it signifies failure to exercise standard of care
which the doer as a reasonable man should have exercised in the circumstances.
II. DEFINITION:
· WINFIELD AND JOLOWICZ: According to Winfield and Jolowicz- Negligence is the breach of a legal duty to take care which results in damage,
undesired by the defendant to the plaintiff [Ref. Winfield and Jolowicz on Tort, Ninth Edition, 1971, p. 45].
In Blyth v. Birmingham Water Works Co., (1856) ALDERSON, B. defined negligence as, negligence is the omission to do something which a
reasonable man would do, or doing something which a prudent or reasonable man would not do.
In Lochgelly Iron & Coal Co. v. Mc Mullan, 1934 - LORD WRIGHT said, negligence means more than headless or careless conduct, whether in
commission or omission; it properly connotes the complex concept of duty, breach and damage thereby suffered by the person to whom the duty
was owing.
III. ESSENTIALS OF NEGLIGENCE: - In an action for negligence, the plaintiff has to prove the following essentials:
1. DUTY TO TAKE CARE: One of the essential conditions of liability for negligence is that the defendant owed a legal duty towards the plaintiff. The
following case laws will throw some light upon this essential element.
2. DUTY TO WHOM: Donoghue v. Stevenson, 1932 carried the idea further and expanded the scope of duty saying that the duty so raised
extends to your neighbour.
3. DUTY MUST BE TOWARDS THE PLAINTIFF- It is not sufficient that the defendant owed a duty to take care. It must also be established that the
defendant owed a duty of care towards the plaintiff.
4. BREACH OF DUTY TO TAKE CARE: Yet another essential condition for the liability in negligence is that the plaintiff must prove that the
defendant committed a breach of duty to take care or he failed to perform that duty.
5. CONSEQUENT DAMAGE OR CONSEQUENTIAL HARM TO THE PLAINTIFF: The last essential requisite for the tort of negligence is that the
damage caused to the plaintiff was the result of the breach of the duty. The harm may fall into following classes: -
IV. DEFENCES FOR NEGLIGENCE: In an action for negligence following defences are available: -
1. CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE: It was the Common law rule that anyone who by his own negligence contributed to the injury of which he
complains cannot maintain an action against another in respect of it. Because, he will be considered in law to be author of his wrong.
2. ACT OF GOD OR VIS MAJOR: It is such a direct, violent, sudden and irresistible act of nature as could not, by any amount of human foresight
have been foreseen or if foreseen, could not by any amount of human care and skill, have been resisted. Such as, storm, extraordinary fall of rain,
extraordinary high tide, earth quake etc.
3. INEVITABLE ACCIDENT: Inevitable accident also works as a defence of negligence. An inevitable accident is that which could not possibly, be
prevented by the exercise of ordinary care, caution and skill. it means accident physically unavoidable.
· In Brown v. Kendal, (1859)- the plaintiff’s and defendant’s dogs were fighting, while the defendant was trying to separate them, he accidentally hit
the plaintiff in his eye who was standing nearby. The injury to the plaintiff was held to be result of inevitable accident and the defendant was not
liable.
· In Holmes v. Mather, (1875); a pair of horses were being driven by the groom of the defendant on a public highway. On account of barking of a
dog, the horses started running very fast. The groom made best possible efforts to control them but failed. The horses knocked down the plaintiff
who was seriously injured, it was held to be an inevitable accident and the defendant was not liable.
· In Stanley v. Powell, (1891); the plaintiff and the defendant, who were members of a shooting party, went for pheasant shooting. The defendant
fired at a pheasant, but the shot from his gun glanced off an oak tree and injured the plaintiff. It was held that the accident was an inevitable
accident and the defendant was not liable.

Nuisance -
The word 'nuisance' is derived from the French word 'nuire' and the Latin word 'Nocera' which means to do hurt or to annoy. Nuisance is an injury to
the right of a person in possession of property to undisturbed enjoyment of it and results from an improper use by another person of his own
property.    
 Nuisance can be divided   into Two broad categories.
   1) public nuisance.  
   2) private nuisance.
1) public nuisance:
According to section 268 of I.P.C. public nuisance is a criminal offence. A person is guilty of a public nuisance who does any act, or is guilty of any
illegal omission, which causes any common injury, danger or annoyance, to the public or to the people in general who dwell, or occupy property in
the vicinity, or which must necessarily cause injury, obstruction, danger or annoyance to persons who may have occasion to use any public right.
1) he must show a particular injury to himself beyond that which is suffered by the rest of public.
2) such injury must be direct and not a mere consequential injury.
3) the injury must be substantial character.
Soltan v/s. De held (1851)
The plaintiff resided in a house next to a roman catholic chapel of which the defendant was the priest and the chapel bell was rung at all hours of
the day and night. It was held that the ringing was public nuisance and the plaintiff was held entitled to an injunction.
2) private nuisance:
It may be defined as unlawful interference with another's use and enjoyment of property or some right over or in connection with property. Action for
nuisance lies for the protection of plaintiff's property rather than for damages.
Private nuisance is the using or authorizing the use of one's 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 by interfering materially with his health, comfort or convenience. Private nuisance include
acts leading to
Ware v/s. Garston
    A trailer attached to a lorry was kept unattended on the highway. At night time no rear light was shown. A motorcyclist ran into the trailer. It was
held that it was an obstruction on the highway and as such as a public nuisance.
Let’s See Who can sue for nuisance: 
1) who creates or continues a nuisance or authorizes or suffers the creation of a nuisance or
2) who let's or sells property with a nuisance on it. 
Remedies for private nuisance   
a) abatement b) damages c) injunction
Remedies for public nuisance
a) injunction b) criminal action.   c) declaration
Who can sue in public nuisance?
  A private individual can also sue for public nuisance if the shows that:
a) he has suffered some special damage apart from the general damage suffered by the public.
b) the injury was direct and not consequential.
c) the injury was substantial.
Defamation under the Indian Penal Code
Introduction
Every Person has right to maintain and preserve his reputation. The Right of reputation is more valuable than right to property. Law gives
protection to a man's reputation. Chapter XXI, Section 499 to 502 of Indian Penal Code relates to offenses of Defamation. 
Meaning of Defamation 
When injury caused to the reputation of a person it can be termed as defamation. Defamation is both a crime and civil wrong
Definition of defamation
Section 499 of Indian Penal Code defines defamation with for Explanations and ten exceptions and number of illustrations
Defamation 
The definition of the Defamation contains three essential elements
i) the person ii) his reputation, and iii) the harm to reputation of the person with necessary mens rea (guilty mind)
Essential Ingredients The offence of defamation consists of the following essential Ingredients:
1) Making or Publishing of an Imputation concerning person. 
2) Such Imputation must have made by
     i) words either Spoken or
     ii) signs or
     iii) visible representations;
3) offender intends to harm, or knows or has reason to believe that such imputation will harm the reputation of that person.
Explanations 
1. It may amount to defamation to impute anything to a deceased person, if the imputation would harm the reputation of that person if living, and is
intended to be hurtful to the feelings of his family or other near relatives.
2. It may amount to defamation to make an imputation concerning a company or an association or collection of persons as such.
3. An imputation in the form of an alternative or expressed ironically, may amount to defamation.
Punishment for defamation (Section 500 I.P.C) -
Printing or engraving matter known to be defamatory Section 501 – Printing or engraving matter known to be defamatory - Whoever prints or
engraves any matter, knowing or having good reason to believe that such matter is defamatory of any person, shall be punished with simple
imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.
Sale of printed or engraved substance containing defamatory matter Section 502 - 
Sale of printed or engraved substance containing defamatory matter - Whoever sells or offers for sale any printed or engraved substance containing
defamatory matter, knowing that it contains such matter, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or
with fine, or with both.
The offence under section 502 is non-cognizable, bailable, compoundable and triable by the Court of Session. 

The Motor Vehicles Act, 1988:

The Motor Vehicles Act was passed in the year 1988 by Parliament of India and regulates almost all the aspects of road transport vehicles. It
provides detailed provision on licensing of the drivers and conductors, registration of motor vehicles, the provision on controlling their permits, traffic
regulation, related insurance, liabilities, and penalties.
This act majorly concentrates on innocent people who are on the road and can get affected by drivers of these motor vehicles. The motor vehicle
act provides a provision for compensation for such helpless people. They are referred to as "Third Party" and the motor vehicle act revolves around
providing safety to these third-party people.
The motor vehicle act makes it mandatory for a driver to have a valid driving license and no motor vehicle can be driven without being registered
under the motor vehicle act. This certificate of registration shall be valid for next fifteen years from date of registration and can be further renewed
for next five years. 
The various offenses and related penalties are mentioned below:
• Under section 3 r/w 181 Motor Vehicle Act, a person driving without a valid license shall have to pay a penalty of INR 500/- and or imprisonment of
around three months.
• Under section 5 r/w 180 Motor Vehicle Act, a person allowing his vehicle to be driven by a person who do not have a valid license shall have to
pay a penalty of INR 1000/- with or without three months of imprisonment.
• Under section 130(3) r/w 177 Motor Vehicle Act, a person not carrying all the documents required shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 100/-.
• Under section 130 r/w 177 Motor Vehicle Act, a person driving without a valid insurance shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 1000/- with or
without an imprisonment of three months.
• Under section 130 r/w 177 Motor Vehicle Act, a person driving without a valid permit shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 5000/- which could not
be less than INR 2000/-.
• Under section 130 r/w 177 Motor Vehicle Act, a person driving without a valid fitness shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 5000/- which could not
be less than INR 2000/-.
• Under section 39 r/w 192 Motor Vehicle Act, a person without a valid R.C, for his vehicle shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 2000/-.
• Under section 4 r/s 181 Motor Vehicle Act, a minor driving the vehicle shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 500/-.
• Under section 5 r/w 180 Motor Vehicle Act, allowing an unauthorized person to drive shall levy a penalty of INR 1000/-.
• Under section 129 r/w 177 Motor Vehicle Act, a person driving without helmet shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 100/-.
• Under section 138(3) CMVR 177 Motor Vehicle Act, a person driving without fastening his seat belt shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 100/-.
• Under section 184 Motor Vehicle Act, a person found doing rash driving shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 1000/-.
• Under section 112-183 Motor Vehicle Act, a person found of doing hasty or dangerous driving shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 1000/- with or
without imprisonment depending on the severity of the fault.
• Under section 17(i) RRR 177 Motor Vehicle Act, a person driving in a one way against the way shall be liable to pay a penalty of INR 100/-.
There are various other penalties under the motor vehicle act for various scenarios which could be found on government website in details which
relates to road marking related offenses, number plate related offences, vehicle light related offences, horn related offences, traffic police relate
offences, traffic signal related offences, speed and overtake related offences, offences related to pollution, offences related condition of motor
vehicle, offenses related to parking, etc.
Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Introduction:
The Consumer Protection Act 1986 was passed by the Indian Parliament to protect consumer rights and to redress consumer complaints and
resolve consumer disputes.
Every individual is a consumer of goods and services and expects a fair deal against unfair exploitation.
This Consumer Protection Act applies to the whole of India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir and covers all goods and services purchased
by the consumers and to all sectors — private, public and cooperative. The objective of the Act is “to provide for better protection of the interests of
consumers and for that purpose to make provisions for the establishment of Consumer Councils and other authorities for the settlement of
consumer disputes and for matters connected therewith”. It protects the consumers from unfair trading or unfair trade practices.
The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 provides for the following rights to the consumers:
(a) Right to be heard and to be assured that consumers’ interests will receive due consideration at appropriate forum;
(b) Right to seek redressal against unfair trade practices or unscrupulous exploitation of consumers; and
(c) Right to consumer education.
The Consumer Protection (Amendment) Act 1993 adds the following consumer rights:
(d) The right to be assured wherever possible, access to a variety of goods and services at competitive prices;
(e) The right to be informed about the quality, potency, purity, standard and price of goods (or services as the case may be) so as to protect the
consumers against unfair trade practices; and
(f) The right to be protected against the marketing of goods (and services) which are hazardous to life and property.
The State Consumer Commission shall consist of:
(1) A person who is or has been a judge of a high court appointed by the State Government,
(2) Two other members of high standing and eminence who have adequate knowledge or experience concerning the problems relating to law,
commerce, economics, industry, public administration etc. one of whom shall be a woman.
The State Consumer Commission as per the amendment of the Act in 2002 shall have the jurisdiction to entertain complaints where the value of
goods or services and compensation claimed if any exceeds Rs. 20 lakhs but is not more than Rs. 1 crore.
The National Consumer Commission will consist of:
(a) A person who is or has been a judge of the Supreme Court and is appointed by the Central Government in consultation with Chief Justice of
India. He will also work as president of the national commission,
(b) Four other members of eminence having good knowledge or experience and ability to deal with the problems relating to commerce, economics,
law, industry, public affairs or administration and one of whom shall be a woman.
National Consumer Commission has the jurisdiction:
(1) To entertain complaints where the value of goods or services and compensation claimed if any is, according to Amendment Act 2002, one crore
or more;
(2) National Commission is authorized to hear appeals against the order of any State Consumer Commission;
(3) The Central Commission has the right to call for the records from the State Commissions.
It is important to note that all forums, commissions appointed under the Consumer Protection Act are in substantial matters not different from the
ordinary civil courts. They are quasi-judicial tribunals created to render speedy justice
Conclusion:
In view of the above usefulness and wide applicability of Consumer Protection Act, Mr. G.L. Sanghi is right in concluding, “In each and every area
involving sale of goods and services for valuable consideration a consumer stands protected. The polarity of this law is unlimited. Its machinery is
effective and awesome to the delinquent trader with solace to the consumer. As experience grows further improvements will un-doubleted make this
remedy more and more useful”.

Consumers – definition and meaning

Consumers are people or organizations that purchase products or services. The term also refers to hiring goods and services. They are humans or
other economic entities that use a good or service. Furthermore, they do not sell on that item that they bought.
They are the end users in the distribution chain of goods and services. In fact, sometimes the consumer might not be the buyer.
For example, young children are the end users of toys, but their parents buy them. Therefore, in the market for toys, the buyer and consumer are
often different people.
Consumers in biology
In biology, a consumer is an organism that consumes other organisms or organic matter. That is how they get their energy.
In the animal kingdom, for example, consumers prey on other organisms because they cannot produce their own energy. Neither can they obtain
energy from inorganic sources.
In that sense, a human being is a biological consumer. To obtain energy, we eat other organisms.
Consumer vs. Customer
We often use the terms ‘consumers’ and ‘customers’ interchangeably. However, they do not always have the same meaning. A customer is not
always the consumer.
Customers purchase things, but consumers use them.
For example, the customers of a company that sells pet food are mostly adults. However, the consumers are dogs or cats.
The difference between consumers and customers impacts how businesses market their products. Customers buy toys, for example, if consumers
– children – demand them.
Therefore, toy company’s should target children in their marketing efforts. Children will subsequently react to the marketing efforts by influencing
what adults buy.
Of course, in many cases, consumers and customers are the same people. A ladies’ clothing store will sell mainly to the end users.
What is consumer law?
Consumer law involves all the regulations and statutes that aim to create a more equitable balance for consumers. It also aims to prevent vendors
from using dishonest tactics.
In the United States, both state and federal regulations play a role in regulating consumer law. These laws include forbidding false advertising and
imposing product safety measures.
The government also lays down regulations regarding debt collection practices and protecting consumers’ identifying data.
Consumers sometimes fall victim to online scams or buying a product without being told of hidden defects. People have also lost money in financial
schemes, identity theft, or illegal and unauthorized credit card charges.
Consumers commonly have to seek legal advice when they fall victim to unethical practices. In fact, economists say that people who know what
their rights are, help improve the economy.
Regarding consumers understanding their rights, the British Government wrote:
“Consumers who understand their rights can play a strong part in driving growth because they force businesses to innovate and pursue efficiency.”
“For this, they need both competitive markets and a strong but simple framework of consumer law that can be effectively enforced.”