Torts Project - Award Of Damages - Indian Practice.docx

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, ODISHA

PROJECT ON AWARD OF DAMAGES:INDIAN PRACTICE

SUBMITTED TO: ASSISTANT PROF. HIRANMAYEE MISHRA SUBMITTED BY: RATAN PRIYA BHARATI, ROLL NO. 41 RAJUL CHATURVEDI, ROLL NO. 40

B.A. LL.B.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Objectives 3. Research Methodology 4. Hypothesis 5. Research Question 6. Damages: Concept, Types & Procedure 7. Concept of Awarding Damages in India: Absolute Liability 8. Judicial Approach of Awarding Damages in India  Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India(Bhopal Gas Tragedy)  M.C. Mehta v. Union of India(Oleum Gas Leak Case 9. Conclusion 10. Resources

INTRODUCTION With the evolution of human society the laws administering it have also developed. In this developed and modernized world the laws govern an individual throughout his life. With the evolution of mankind and multiplication of issues of human existence, an increase in the number of wrongs committed against individuals began breeding. Subsequently these wrongs started being recognized since the rights of individuals were being violated. This happened only after people understood what their rights were and what were the wrongs that violated these rights. As a result law of tort came into existence. “The word ‘Tort’ originated from a Latin expression ‘tortum’ , meaning ‘to twist’. Thus tort signifies a behavior which is not straight or lawful, but instead is unlawful or twisted. It is identical to the English expression ‘wrong’.”1 It has been a long time since law of tort has been taught with great efficiency and tolerable ease but there exists a disagreement between different teachers or writers regarding the contents of the subject.2 It now suggests a breach of some obligation free of agreement agreeing to a general purpose or reason for which one can claim remuneration3.“ A tort is a wrong which civil in nature and requires a common law action to compensate for unliquidated damages4, which is not only a breach of contract or rupture of trust or other equitable obligations5.”6 “A tort is a violation of a legal right in rem7 of an individual providing the aggrieved party with a right to claim compensation.”8 After law of tort came into existence there arouse a need for compensating the people whose rights have been violated and have suffered from breach of duty of care. These compensations are known as damages in legal context.

1

Paula Giliker and Silas Beckwitch, Tort ( 4th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2011). W.V.H. Rogers, Winfield & Jolovicz: Tort (18th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2010). 3 Money paid to a person for the work or service rendered by him. 4 Damages which cannot be predetemined. 5 W.V.H. Rogers, Winfield & Jolovicz: Tort (18th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2010). 6 Salmond & Heuston, Law of Torts (20th edition, 1992). 7 Right in rem is a right available against the whole world. 8 ‘Definition of tort’ < www.lawnotes.in/Definition_of_Tort>accessed 3rd September 2015. 2

Damages refer to compensation in monetary terms that are awarded by a court to the aggrieved party in case of civil wrong when the plaintiff9 has suffered some loss due to the wrongful act of the defendant10. It measures the extent of loss or harm suffered by the plaintiff. Damages are different from costs since the latter refers to the expenses incurred in filing a lawsuit, which the losing party has to pay. Similarly damages differ from verdict in then sense that verdict is the final decision of the court. The essential rule to be followed while granting any damages is restitution integrum11where the exception lies only in cases of non-pecuniary losses12 and exemplary damages13. Damages awarded to the plaintiff are of various kinds depending upon the nature of tort committed by the tortfeasor14.They are: Nominal damages, Contemptuous damages, Compensatory damages, Aggravated damages, Exemplary damages and Prospective damages. “Nominal damages refer to the damages which are very trivial in nature i.e. a very small amount in cases where the legal right of the plaintiff has been violated but he has not suffered any loss thereby (injuria sine damno15).”16 Then we have contemptuous damages. “Contemptuous damages are those damages which are awarded when the court is of the view that the case should not have been brought before it because the plaintiff has not really suffered a loss. In such cases the contemptuous damages are paid in least possible denomination. It is mostly applicable in cases related to the tort of defamation17.”18 Next in sequence we have the compensatory form of damages. “Compensatory damages are the damages awarded in order to compensate the plaintiff for the loss suffered by 9

Plaintiff is the claimant against whom the tortious act has been committed. Defendant is the tortfeasor or the wrongdoer whose act is illegal and causes harm to the other person. 11 Jenny Steele, Tort Law: Text, Cases, Materials (2nd edition, 2010). 12 Losses like pain and suffering which are difficult for the court to calculate. 13 Ratanlal Ranchhoddas & Dhirajlal Keshavlal Thakore, Ratanlal & Dhirajlal: The Law of Torts( LexisNexis, 26th edition,2010). 14 < www.wordnik.com/words/tortfeasor> accessed 3rd September 2015. 15 ‘Discuss the meaning of the term injuria sine damno’< www.gktoday.in/answer/discuss-the-meaning-of-the-terminjuria-sine-damno> accessed 3rd September 2015. 16 Paula Giliker and Silas Beckwitch, Tort ( 4th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2011). 17 Jenny Steele, Tort Law: Text, Cases, Materials (2nd edition, 2010) 762. 18 Ratanlal Ranchhoddas & Dhirajlal Keshavlal Thakore, Ratanlal & Dhirajlal: The Law of Torts( LexisNexis, 25th edition, Reprint 2009). 10

him as a result of the negligence or unlawful conduct on the part of the other party. The plaintiff not only needs to prove that he has suffered a loss resulting from the actions of the defendant but also needs to quantify the amount of loss suffered in front of the concerned court.”19 Then comes the next type of damages awarded viz. aggravated damages. Aggravated damages are those exceptional damages which are paid to the plaintiff by the defendant when the latter’s act subjects the former to humiliation and malicious20 circumstances. The next category of damages is exemplary damages. Exemplary damages are those damages which are awarded in order to penalize the tortfeasor and discourage him from repeating the same conduct in future rather than compensating the plaintiff. Moving on to the next categorization, we have Prospective damages. These damages are those kind of damages that take into account all the harmful consequences of wrongful act , both foreseeable and unforeseeable, which have arisen or may arise and one single compensation would be enough for all the present and future losses incurred. Law of torts and awarding of damages is a very new concept introduced in the Indian Legal System and is still gaining momentum. It was introduced in India by the British. “When British came to India and established their Company they felt that there was a need of a proper Judicial set-up to govern the subjects of the Company. As a result, they established various courts in India. The courts used to work on the principles of justice, equity and good conscience. The British courts in India used to interpret the English laws to impart justice in India. The law of tort is thus originally an English concept and the Indian courts interpret and analyze the English laws according to the situations prevalent in India before applying any rule of English origin. However, Indian courts are not restricted to common law21.”22 Thus the emergence of law of torts in our country is a result of the introduction of English Legal System in India during the British rule.

‘Compensatory damages’< www.investopedia.com/terms/c/compensatory-damages.asp> accessed 12th September 2015. 20 With bad intent. 21 Glanville Williams, ‘Glanville Williams: Learning The Law’ in A.T.H. Smith(eds), Glanville Williams: Learning The Law ( 14th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2013) 21. 22 A Lakshminath & M Sridhar, Ramaswamy Iyer’s : The Law of Torts (10th edition, LexisNexis 2007). 19

There is this concept of absolute liability under tort section of the Legal System in India which has originally emerged in our country itself. Absolute liability is a no fault liability where defendant is held liable regardless of the fact that his action was negligent or not. There are no exceptions in case of the rule of absolute liability unlike the rule of strict liability, therefore absolute liability is a stricter concept. The rule of absolute liability has emerged in India with the famous case of MC Mehta v. Union of India23. This rule was later approved in Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India24 case and also the famous Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India 25(Bhopal Gas Tragedy case). This entire research project revolves around the concept of damages, its types and how are they awarded in India particularly in case of absolute liability with close reference to various case studies.

OBJECTIVES 1. To understand the meaning and process of awarding damages in India. 2. To examine the evolution of the concept of awarding damages in India. 3. To study the concept of awarding damages in absolute liability cases. 4. To show the emergence and evolution of the system of awarding damages in India with close reference to cases like Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India(Bhopal Gas Tragedy) and MC Mehta v. Union of India.

23

AIR 1987 SC 965. AIR 1990 SC 1480. 25 AIR 1992 SC 248. 24

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The technique of study used in this research project is highly systematic, detailed, inquisitive and explanatory in nature. The researchers have exhausted, to the fullest, data from both primary and secondary sources which include various books, reports, articles and websites in order to make a comprehensive approach for this thesis.

HYPOTHESIS The practice of awarding damages in case of wrong committed against individuals is a relatively new concept in Indian Legal System.

RESEARCH QUESTION 1. What is the meaning and the process of awarding damages in India? 2. How has the concept of awarding damages in India evolved? 3. What is the concept of awarding damages in India in cases of absolute liability? 4. How has the concept of awarding damages evolved in India in Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India & MC Mehta v. Union of India cases.

DAMAGES: CONCEPT, TYPES & PROCEDURE Concept: Damages refer to the monetary compensations provided to the injured party in case of infringement of his legal rights or breach of duty of care towards him by any other party . The objective of awarding damages to the aggrieved party is to restore his original position as it was before the tortious act was committed against him by the tortfeasor. Moreover, when a plaintiff claims damages from the defendant the burden of proof lies on the former to prove his case in order to get compensated. The plaintiff needs to provide evidences in support of his claim This concept also says that the plaintiff is compensated only when he can prove the opposite party is guilty and cannot plead any defence . The general defences that a defendant can plead are: 1. Violenti non fit injuria26 - When a plaintiff voluntarily consents to the wrong or harm done to him by the defendant. 2. Plaintiff, the wrongdoer - If the plaintiff’s action in itself is unlawful he cannot claim for damages from the defendant for his(defendant’s) wrongful act. 3. Inevitable Accident - A plaintiff is not subject to compensation if the action causing harm to him is a result of unforeseen and unavoidable accident ,in spite of reasonable care taken on the part of the defendant. 4. Vis Major 27 - A plaintiff cannot claim compensation when the act which causes damage is a result of some unforeseeable and uncontrollable natural cause without any intervention of human species.

‘ General Defences in Torts’< www.lawctopus.com/academike/general-defences-in-torts/> accessed 15th September 2015. 27 It means by the act of God. 26

5. Private Defence - A plaintiff cannot claim compensation if defendant’s action was an act of protecting himself against some external force used against him either by the plaintiff or some other person. 6. Mistake - An act done under honest belief of it to be true gives a plea of defence to the defendant. Mistake of fact is a defence at times but mistake of law is not. 7. Necessity - To avoid greater harm if a lesser harm is caused then no cause of action lies with the plaintiff and he cannot claim damages. 8. Statutory Authority – A plaintiff cannot claim damages for an action that has been authorized or prescribed by law.

Types of Damages: Damages awarded in cases of tortious acts are of various kinds. They are as follows: 1. Contemptuous damages – These are the damages awarded in cases where the court is of the opinion that the plaintiff should not be compensated completely because the plaintiff’s conduct was such that it provoked or aggravated the defendant’s wrongful act. Compensation paid is of very trifling amount only because plaintiff’s legal right was infringed. 2. Nominal damages28 – These are the damages awarded when the plaintiff’s legal right has been violated but he has not suffered any actual loss. His conduct is not questionable as is in the case of contemptuous damages and the tortious liability is actionable per se29. 3. Compensatory & Exemplary damages30 – Compensatory damages are the damages awarded to the plaintiff in order to compensate him for the wrongful acts of the defendant. On the other hand exemplary damages are the damages awarded to punish the defendant so that he doesn’t repeat his conduct in the future. 4. Aggravated Damages – The court awards an increased amount of damages to the plaintiff when an injury has been caused to his feelings or he has been insulted. In such

28

W.V.H. Rogers, Winfield & Jolovicz: Tort (18th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2010). in itself. 30 Asif Tufal, ‘Remedies Lecture’< www.lawteacher.net/PDF/Remedies%20Lecture.pdf> accessed 15 th September 2015. 29

cases the court takes into account the defendant’s wrong motives and awards damages to the plaintiff. 5. Prospective Damages31 – These are the damages awarded for future perspective losses . In cases where the plaintiff has not suffered any damage as of now but the court calculates damages keeping in mind what will happen to the plaintiff in future and also what would have happened if the injury would not have taken place. This is done in order to estimate the difference between the two and thus calculate damages.

Procedure: Damages awarded in tortious as well as civil liability cases are based on the primary principle of restitutio ad integrum32. Restitutio ad integrum is a Latin word , meaning restoring to the original condition. The only exception to it are cases of non-pecuniary losses33 and award of exemplary damages. The concept is that damages are awarded with the motive of placing the plaintiff in the same position as he or she would have been if the tortious act had not been committed. The plaintiff should be completely compensated , be it for direct or for future injuries. The compensation is awarded not for the physical injury suffered but for the inconvenience caused i.e. loss of earnings due to that physical injury. Damages awarded in the form of monetary compensation are most justifiable by this principle because the former is the most practical way of providing relief for the deprivation caused by the physical injury suffered.

31

R.K. Bangia, The Law of Torts (23rd edition, Allahabad Law Agency 2013) 408. Jenny Steele, Tort Law: Text, Cases, Materials (2nd edition, 2010). 33 Jenny Steele, Tort Law: Text, Cases, Materials (2nd edition, 2010). 32

CONCEPT OF AWARDING DAMAGES IN INDIA: ABSOLUTE LIABILITY Absolute liability is a liability without any fault on the part of the defendant i.e. a liability without any intention of committing the tortious act or without being negligent. It is kind of an exception under the common law because a person is usually held liable only when the harm done by him is intentional or is a result of his negligence. The law thus at times recognizes No fault liability34. No fault liability is the rule of fixing liability where people are held liable for all the damage and loss caused by their actions or by omission of certain actions. In such cases people are held liable regardless of any fault or negliegence35 intentionally or unintentionally on their part. The burden of proof in such cases lies with the plaintiff with respect to the tortious act having been occurred. Although rule of Strict liability36 and the rule of Absolute liability37 come under the concept of no fault liability there is a slight difference between the two. “The rule of strict liability is a no fault liability case where the defendant can at times plead certain differences like Act of God, Act of third party, Plaintiff’s own fault, Plaintiff’s own consent and Statutory authority38”39. On the other hand in cases of absolute liability the defendant cannot plead any defence. Therefore, absolute liability is no defence liabilty. The rule of absolute liability is stricter than the rule of strict liability. The rule of absolute liability emerged from the rule of strict liability so technically we need to understand the latter first. The concept of strict liability emerged in Ryland v. Fletcher40 case.

34

W.V.H. Rogers, Winfield & Jolovicz: Tort (18th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2010). Ratanlal Ranchhoddas & Dhirajlal Keshavlal Thakore, Ratanlal & Dhirajlal: The Law of Torts( LexisNexis, 25th edition, Reprint 2009). 36 Jenny Steele, Tort Law: Text, Cases, Materials (2nd edition, 2010). 37 R.K. Bangia, The Law of Torts (23rd edition, Allahabad Law Agency 2013). 38 Jenny Steele, Tort Law: Text, Cases, Materials (2nd edition, 2010). 39 W.V.H. Rogers, Winfield & Jolovicz: Tort (18th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2010). 40 Ryland v. Flecther [1868]3 LR HL 330. 35

In the above mentioned case the plaintiff and the defendant were neighbours. The plaintiff owned mines and the defendant was mill owner. The defendant was in need of water for his mill. Therefore he employed some independent contractors41 to perform the task of constructing a reservoir on his land .The reservoir was to provide water to his mill. Independent contractors were people who were experts and were competent in performing the job of construction of reservoir. While constructing the reservoir the independent contractors came across some old mine shafts. Also near those mine shafts was a passage to plaintiff’s land. The independent contractors thought that the mine shafts were filled with earth and are of no use. So they did not block those up. When the reservoir was constructed and filled it with water, the water from the mine shafts went to the plaintiff’s mines and destroyed them. Plaintiff complained against the defendant. The defendant pleaded that he was not negligent as he had no knowledge of the shafts. Also the works was done by the independent contractors and not him. In this case the defendant was held liable even though no negligence was established on his part. In this case the judgment given by Blackburn J. is considered as very important. Blackburn stated that he who brings on his land anything which if escapes is capable of causing mischief42 must keep that at his peril. But if he does not and that thing escapes and causes damage, then person is responsible for all the consequences caused due to that escape. The rule which Blackburn gave did not provide for establishment of any kind of negligence .The only essential requirements for this concept to be applicable were that there had to be non-natural use of land43, escape of thing and damage caused due to the escape. With this case evolved the concept of Strict Liability. In his judgment Blackburn J. also stated that “Defendant can excuse himself from liability by showing that escape was caused due to plaintiff’s fault or it was act of God”44. But in this case no defence could be proved. So by this and also as mentioned above in strict liability there are cases where the defendant could use some of the defences available to escape from the liability. Due to this the defendant can rightfully claim defence and plaintiff is not compensated even when his cause of action is of atmost importance and he should compensated properly. So there arose a need to have a liability where no such defences were available to the defendant. In that A Lakshminath & M Sridhar, Ramaswamy Iyer’s : The Law of Torts (10th edition, LexisNexis 2007)821. ‘The distributive turn; mischief, misfortune and tort law’ <www.quinnipiac.edu/prebuilt/pdf/ /23 16QLR315(1996-1997).pdf> accessed 15th September 2015. 43 David W. Williams, ‘Non Natural Use of Land’[1973]The Cambridge Law Journal. 44 A Lakshminath & M Sridhar, Ramaswamy Iyer’s : The Law of Torts (10th edition, LexisNexis 2007). 41 42

kind of liability the defendant is supposed to be liable for the damage caused to the plaintiff and in no case can he can plead any defence and excuse himself of any liability. Then came the concept of absolute liability. This liability by the name itself states that it is absolute, meaning the defendant cannot avail himself of any defence and is completely liable for his actions in tort. The concept of absolute liability has developed in India with the case of MC Mehta v Union of India45. The court held about absolute liability rule that it is ‘absolute and non-delegable’. “In this case the defendant cannot escape the liability stating that he has taken reasonable care and there was no negligence on his part.”46 The requirements of absolute liability are same as strict liability. Requirements are: 1. Non-natural use of land-The rule of absolute liability to be applied requires non-natural use of land. It is not necessary that the thing must be inherently dangerous but it should be such that it has capacity of causing damage if it escapes. 2. Escape: The escape is must. If the thing causing damage does not escape from the premises of the defendant then no cause of action lies. 3. Damage: Damage is necessary. Also it is necessary that damage is caused due to the thing that has escaped. All these conditions need to be fulfilled for tort of absolute liability to apply. Even in the absence of any one of them the absolute liability fails to apply. The practice of awarding damages in India with respect to the rule of absolute liability can be further explained properly by discussing the very famous cases of Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India47(Bhopal Gas Tragedy) & MC Mehta Case48.

45

(1987) 1 SCC 395. A Lakshminath & M Sridhar, Ramaswamy Iyer’s : The Law of Torts (10th edition, LexisNexis 2007). 47 AIR 1992 SC 248. 48 (1992) 3 SCC3 28. 46

JUDICIAL APPROACH OF AWARDING DAMAGES IN INDIA Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India (Bhopal Gas Tragedy): Facts: “Union Carbide Corporation Ltd. was a US based company which set up its branch Union Carbide India Ltd. in India manufacturing pesticides in the city of Bhopal consisting of a toxic chemical named Methyl Isocyanate(MIC). The company stored the chemical in huge tanks instead of small bottles as were supposed to be and moreover the tank was 87% full instead of 50% which was the storage capacity of the tank. Owing to various negligent acts like storing of the chemical without proper air conditioning, mixing of water with the chemical which was explosive and negligence49 on the part of the employees as well as employers of the company, there was a leakage of the gas from tank no. 610 on the night of 2nd December 1984. The toxic gas spread dangerously across the city leading to the death of 3000 people and injuries were caused to people amounting to more than six lacs with various respiratory, reproductory and eye diseases. No prior alarms or warnings were given and no evacuation was done either. Moreover the doctors had no idea how to treat the patients who arrived at the hospitals in pathetic conditions as UCIL has not provided them with any emergency information. The next morning extent of damage was discovered with dead bodies of humans and animals spread all over the streets of the city and the smell of chilli pepper lingering in the air.”50 A

49

R.K. Bangia, The Law of Torts (23rd edition, Allahabad Law Agency 2013)220. ‘Bhopal Gas Tragedy’ <www.icmrindia.org/freeresources/casestudies/TheBhopalGasTragedy1.htm> accesssed 15th September 2015. 50

number of cases were filled against the UCC in Bhopal and in the U.S.A. as well on the behalf of the victims. Since out of court settlement between the Government of India and the UCC failed, the former passed an Ordinance51 at first and “The Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster(Processing of Claims) Act, 1985”52. This Act conferred the right on the Central Government to represent every person associated with the Bhopal Gas Tragedy incident. “ The Government of India filled a claim in the District Court of New York, U.S.A against the UCC but the claim was dismissed on the grounds of forum non conveniens53. Later the case was filled in Madhya Pradesh High Court and Supreme Court of India simultaneously.

Judgment: Supreme Court on February 14, 1989 passed an order directing the payment of 470 million U.S. dollars or 750 crores as compensation. The sum was to be paid by the UCC to the Union of India on or before March 31st , 1989. Compensation was awarded as follows: 1. Fatal cases- 70 crores 2. Total or Partial Disability- 250 crores 3. Temporary disabilities - 100 crores 4. Utmost severe injuries - 80 crores 5. Facility for Medical Care – 25 crores 6. Minor injuries, personal belongings & loss of livestock – 225 crores

The Supreme Court further ordered for the establishment of hospital equipped properly to handle the case of gas victims. Years after this disaster had occurred and settlement had been made the affairs of the state were still unsatisfactory. As a result The Public Liability Act54, 1991 has been passed.

51

See Article 123 in The Constitution of India. Published in Gaz. of India, 29-3-1985. 53 R.K. Bangia, The Law of Torts (23rd edition, Allahabad Law Agency 2013)338. 54 The Act received the assent of the President on 22-1-1991. 52

Conclusion: So it is clear in the above mentioned case that the damages awarded to the victims were calculated keeping in mind every aspect of the inconvenience caused to them. Yes it is true that the compensation asked was not adequate but was split into every possible divisions where plaintiff suffered harm.

M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum gas leak case): Facts: On 4th and 6th december 1985 there was a leakage of Oleum gas from one of the factories of Shriram Foods and Fertilizers industry in Delhi, belonging to Delhi Cloth Mills Ltd. As a result an advocate practicing in the Tis Hazari Court died and many others were affected by the leakage. A writ55 petition was filed by the petitioner56, Shri M.C. Mehta in the year 1985 under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The court realized that this particular incident was second case of such a large scale leakage of a toxic gas in India, just in a matter of a year. So, if the rule of strict liability as laid down in Ryland v Fletcher 57 case was to be applied in this case then the defendant could easily escape from liability pleading some defence to the rule of strict liability. Therefore the Supreme Court took a bold decision of not conforming to the English law58 and evolved a new rule suitable to the conditions prevailing in India. Thus the rule of a Absolute liability came into existence.

55

See Article 32 in The Constitution of India. one who files a petition in the court. 57 Ryland v. Flecther [1868]3 LR HL 330. 58 Glanville Williams, ‘Glanville Williams: Learning The Law’ in A.T.H. Smith(eds), Glanville Williams: Learning The Law ( 14th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2013)2. 56

Judgment: When the very first petition was filed by M.C. Metha stating that Shriram Industries were hazardous to the society and the arguments were heard by a three judges bench, a judgment was passed asking the Shriram Food and Fertilizers Industries to restart its power plant and plants for manufacture of other products like soap, glycerin and hard oil. In due course the incident of gas leakage on 4th and 6th December took place. The further judgment was that the organizations responsible for filing the petition were directed by the court to file case for compensation in appropriate court within two months.

Conclusion: The principle laid down in this case by the Supreme Court is “When any company is engaged in any hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and harm is caused by the working of that company resulting, for example by the release of any toxic gas, the company is strictly and absolutely liable for the harm caused and this liability is not subject to any exceptions59 as given under strict liability.” 60 This principle is known as absolute liability. The court in this case said that the compensation awarded in these kinds of cases must be related to the magnitude and also the capacity of the company causing harm. This is to have a deterrent effect. The amount of compensation must be parallel to the prosperity of the company.

59 60

Exceptions are the defences pleaded by a defendant in order to escape from liability. R.K. Bangia, The Law of Torts (23rd edition, Allahabad Law Agency 2013).

CONCLUSION From the above two cases it is clear that in India damages are awarded differently in different cases according to the variations in the factual situation in those cases. The damages are mainly awarded keeping in mind two set of facts. They are as follows 1. At the time of awarding damages all the aspects where the plaintiff has suffered harm or loss are taken into account. The damages are awarded after clubbing all these amounts. These consist of both pecuniary61 as well as non-pecuniary62 losses. Under the pecuniary losses plaintiff is awarded compensation for both past and future losses, cost of care and loss of earnings. And as per non-pecuniary losses plaintiff is awarded compensation for pain and suffering, loss of amenities and loss of life expectancy. It is generally stated that pecuniary losses are easy for court to ascertain while the non-pecuniary losses are difficult to calculate. But court tries to award both in best possible manner. 2. Court also sees the capacity of parties who are paying the compensation. This matter is looked upon because of concept of duty of care.The bigger is the company the greater is its duty of care towards its customers and people in general.

Thus by ascertaining how the damages are awarded as per Indian practice especially in absolute liability cases the topic of this project is elaborately and comprehensively discussed and this project comes to an end.

61 62

These are the losses that can be measured precisely in monetary terms. These are the losses which cannot be measured precisely.

RESOURCES Books: 1. The Law of Torts, 25th Edition reprint 2009, by Ratanlal and Dhirajlal. 2. Law of Torts, 23rd Edition reprint 2013, by Dr. R.K. Bangia. 3. Ramaswamy Iyer’s The Law of Torts, 10th Edition 2007, by A Lakshminathan & M Sridhar 4. Glanville Williams: Learning The Law,14th edition , by A.T.H. Smith 5. Tort , 4th edition by Paula Giliker & Silas Beckwith 6. Tort Law: Text, Cases And Materials, 2nd edition, by Jenny Steele 7. Winfield & Jolovicz: Tort ,18th edition , by W.V.H. Rogers

Websites: 1. www.icmrindia.org/freeresources/casestudies/TheBhopalGasTragedy1.htm 2. www.lawteacher.net/PDF/Remedies%20Lecture.pdf 3. www.lawctopus.com/academike/general-defences-in-torts/

Journals: 1. All India Report. 2. The Cambridge Law Journal.