Injuria Sine Damno Case Study

HIMACHAL PRADESH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY LAW OF TORTS Submitted to- Ms. Navditya Tanwar Submitted By- Shreem Bajpai Roll. No. - 41

Contents...
TABLE OF CONTENT
ASSIGNMENT 1- INJURIA SINE DAMNO AND DAMNUM SINE INJURIA:-

INJURIA SINE DAMNO:-

In the cases relating to Injuria Sine Damno, there is an infringement of legal right without an actual damage being suffered. The person whose right is infringed has a cause of action. It is where a person`s legal right is infringed but the person may not have suffered a damage or injury. In this case, a plaintiff doesn’t have to prove the damage. It is sufficient to show the infringement of a legal right in which case the law will presume damage. For e.g., assault, libel, trespass on land, etc.
There may not be an actual loss to the physical body of the plaintiff …show more content…
The Defendant dug well in his own land and thereby cut off the underground water supply of stream. Through percolation the water gathered in the well of defendant . The quantity of water of stream was reduced and the mill was closed for non availability of water. Plaintiff sued defendant for damage.

Defendant was not liable, because of principle of Damnum sine injuria. There was no violation of any legal right, though actual loss in money.

In the case of Acton vs. Blundell, the defendant drained the underground water, which went into the plaintiff’s well, making it unusable and causing him injury, but the court held that as the defendant’s act was legal i.e. in accordance with the law and did not breach any legal right of the plaintiff, he will not be liable for the injuries suffered by the plaintiff.

This maxim ‘ Injuria sine Damnum ‘ is just opposite to the maxim ‘ damnum sine injuria’