DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL

LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW

Cattle Trespass Act 1871

Final Draft
Submitted to:

Submitted by:

Ms. Kirti Singh

Kshitiz Nabiyal

Assistant Professor (law)

Roll no. 71
Semester IV
1

BA. LL.B (Hons.)

Acknowledgement
I would like to acknowledge Prof. Gurdeep Singh; Vice Chancellor, Ms. Kirti Singh ;
Assistant Professor (Law) and the Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University,
Lucknow at large for giving me an opportunity to peruse an interesting project in the subject and
Mr. ad specifically for her able guidance and support.

I would like to thank the senior students for their help and advice on approaching the project.

I would like to thank the entire library staff and the digital lab staff of Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya
National Law University for being patient and complying with my requests and needs.

Kshitiz Nabiyal
Roll no. 71
Semester IV
BA. LL.B (Hons.)

BROAD AREA OF STUDY:

Trespass is an area of tort law which could be classified as following:

Trespass to person
Trespass to land
Trespass to goods

Cattle Trespass Act 1871: An early form of strict liability for damage done by trespassing cattle
or other livestock (but not dogs or cats). Under this Act, the owner of livestock that strays on
anothers land and does damage to the land or any property on it is liable for the damage and
any expenses incurred in keeping the livestock or ascertaining to whom it belongs.

OBJECTIVE:
The objective of study is to study about the Cattle Trespass Act 1871. The study aims to
discuss about the Cattle Trespass Act and Strict liability as a tort.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

What are the eminent threats due to Cattle Trespassing?

What causes cattle trespassing?

SIGNIFICANCE OF STUDY:
The project furnishes the reader about Cattle Trespass Act 1871 and the principle of Strict
Liability.
INTRODUCTION:
Animals have been found to be causing great damage to crops, plantations, pleasure-grounds,
roads and the like by straying therein. This became a nuisance which was required to be
arrested and the Government enacted a law relating to
cattle-tresspassing- The Cattle- Trespass Act.
3

This Act can be understood as under the ambit of the tort of special liability. The
Cattle-Trespass Bill having been passed by the legislature received its assent on
13th January, 1871. It came on the Statute Book as The Cattle- Tresspass Act, 1871. It is
intended to address the disputes regarding the liability and redressal after instances of
Cattle-Trespass.
LITERATURE REVIEW:
Law Of Tort - Good book and really good for the academic purposes. The book discuss the
general principles of tortious liability and has also explained the chapter in very precise and easy
manner.
CASES REFERRED:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.

Buckle v. Holmes [1926] 2 K.B. 125.

Ellis v. Loftus Iron Co (1874) L.R 10 C.P. 10; Lee v. Riley (1856) 18 C.B. (N.S.) 722.
Theyer v. Purnell (1918) 2 K.B. 333.
Wormald v. Cole (1954) 1 Q.B. 614 : All E.R. 683.
Cox v. Burbidge (1963) 13 C.B. (N.S.) 430.

CONTENTS:
1. TRESPASS....5
2. Trespass to Land ...5
3. PRELIMINARY ...6
4. POUNDS AND POUNDS-KEEPERS.6
5. IMPOUNDING CATTLE ...7
6. DELIVERY OR SALE OF CATTLE..8
7. COMPLAINTS OF ILLEGAL SEIZURE OR DETENTION10
8. PENALTIES11
9. SUITS FOR COMPENSATION............................12

10. SUPPLEMENTAL..12
11. SOME CASES RELATED TO CATTLE TRESPASS..13
12. CONCLUSION..14
13. BIBLIOGRAPHY..14

TRESPASS
Trespass is an area of criminal law or tort law broadly divided into three groups: trespass to the
person, trespass to chattels and trespass to land.
Trespass to the person involved six separate trespasses: threats, assault, battery, wounding,
mayhem, and maiming. Through the evolution of the common law in various jurisdictions, and
the codification of common law torts, most jurisdictions now broadly recognize three trespasses
to the person assault, which is any act of such a nature as to excite an apprehension of battery.
Trespass to chattels also known as Trespass to goods or Trespass to personal property, is
defined

as

an

intentional

interference

with

the

possession

of

personal

property

proximately causing injury. Trespass to chattel, does not require a showing of damages. Simply
the intermeddling with or use of the personal property of another gives cause of action for
trespass.
Trespass to land is today the tort most commonly associated with the term trespass; it takes the
form of wrongful interference with one's possessory rights in real property. Generally, it is not
necessary to prove harm to a possessor's legally protected interest; liability for unintentional
trespass varies by jurisdiction.

Trespass to Land
Trespass to land is a common law tort or crime that is committed when an individual or the
object of an individual intentionally enters the land of another without a lawful excuse. Trespass
5

to land is actionable per se. Thus, the party whose land is entered upon may sue even if no actual
harm is done. In some jurisdictions, this rule may also apply to entry upon public land having
restricted access. A court may order payment of damages or an injunction to remedy the tort. For
a trespass to be actionable, the tortfeasor must voluntarily go to a specific location, but need not
be aware that he entered the property of a particular person. If A forces B unwillingly onto C's
land, C will not have action in trespass against B, because B's actions were involuntary. C may
instead claim against A. Furthermore, if B is deceived by A as to the ownership or boundaries of
C's land, A may be jointly liable with B for B's trespass.

CATTLE-TRESPASS ACT, 1871

1: PRELIMINARY:

Title and extent-

This Act may be called the Cattle-trespass Act, 1871 and it extends to the whole of the India
except the territories which, immediately before the 1st November, 1956, were comprised in Part
B States and the Presidency-towns and such local areas as the State Government by notification
in the Official Gazette, may from time to time exclude from its operation.

Interpretation clause-

In this Act "cattle" includes elephants, camels, buffaloes, horses, mares, geldings, ponies colts,
fillies, mules, asses, pigs, rams, ewes, sheep, lambs, goats and kids, and
"local authority" means anybody of persons for the time being invested by law with the control
and administration of any matters within a specified local area, and
"local fund" means any fund under the control or management of a local authority.

2: POUNDS AND POUNDS-KEEPERS:

Establishment of pounds-

Pounds shall be established at such places as the Magistrate of the District, subject to the general
control of the State Government, from time to time directs. The village by which every pound is
to be used shall be determined by the Magistrate of the Districts.

Rates of charge for feeding impounded cattle-

The pounds shall be under the control of the Magistrate of the District; and he shall be fixed, and
may alter from time to time, the rates of charge for feeding and watering impounded cattle.

Appointment of pound-keepers-

The State Government shall appoint a pound keeper for every pound. Pound-keepers may hold
other offices. Any pound-keeper may hold simultaneously any other officer under the
Government.

Pound-keepers to be public servants-

Every pound-keeper shall be deemed to be a public servant within the meaning of the Indian
Penal Code.

i.

Duties of pound-keepersTo keep registers and furnish returns. Every pound-keeper shall keep such registers
and furnish such returns as the State Government from time to time directs.

ii.

To register seizures. When cattle are brought to a pound, the pound-keeper shall enter in
his register-

(a) the number and description of the animals,

(b) the day and hour on and at which they were so brought,
(c) the name and residence of the seizure, and
(d) the name and residence of the owner, if known,
and shall give the seizure or his agent a copy of the entry.
iii.

To take charge of and feed cattle. The pound-keeper shall take charge of, feed and
water the cattle until they are disposed of as hereinafter directed.

3: IMPOUNDING CATTLE:
7

Cattle damaging land-

The cultivator or occupier of any land, or any person who has advanced cash for the cultivation
of the crop or produce on any land, or the vendee or mortgagee of such crop or produce, or any
part thereof, may seize or cause to be seized any cattle trespassing on such land, and doing
damage thereto of to any crop or produce thereon, and send them or cause them to be sent within
twenty four hours to the pound established for the village in which the land is situated.

Cattle damaging public roads, canals and embankments-

Persons is charge of public roads, pleasure-grounds, plantations, canals, drainage-works,

embankments and the like, and officers of police, may seize, or cause to be seized, any cattle
doing damage to such roads, grounds, plantations, canals, drainage-works, embankments, and the
like, or the sides or slopes or such roads, canals, drainage-works, or embankments, or found
straying thereon. And shall send them or cause them to be sent within twenty-four hours to the
nearest pound.

Fines for cattle impounded-

For every head of cattle impounded as aforesaid, the pound-keeper shall levy a fine in
accordance with the scale for the time being prescribed by the State Government in this behalf by
notification in the Official Gazette. Different scales may be prescribed for different local areas.
All fines so levied shall be sent to the Magistrate of the District through such officer as the State
Government may direct.

List of fines and charges for feeding-

A list of the fines and of the rates of charge for feeding and watching cattle shall be posted in a
conspicuous place on or near to every pound.

4: DELIVERY OR SALE OF CATTLE:

Procedure when owner claims the cattle and pays fines and charges-

If the owner of the impounded cattle or his agent appear and claim the cattle, the pound keeper
shall deliver them to him on payment of the fines and charges incurred in respect of such cattle.

The owner or his agent, on taking back the cattle, shall sign a receipt for them in the register kept
by the pound-keeper.

Procedure if cattle be not claimed within a week-

If the cattle be not claimed within seven days from the date of their being impounded, the poundkeeper shall report the fact to the officer in charge of the nearest police-station, or to such other
officer as the Magistrate of the District appoints in this behalf.
Such officer shall thereupon stick up in a conspicuous part of his office a notice starting(a) the number and description of the cattle,
(b) the placed where they were seized,
(c) the place where they are impounded,
and shall cause proclamation of the same to be made by beat of drum in the village and at the
market place nearest to the place of seizure.
If the cattle be not claimed within seven days from the date of the notice, they shall be sold by
public auction by the said officer, or an officer of his establishment deputed for that purpose, at
such place and time and subject to such conditions as the Magistrate of the District by general or
special order from time to time directs. Provided that if any such cattle are, in the opinion of the
Magistrate of the District, not likely to fetch a fair price if sold as aforesaid, they may be
disposed of in such manner as he thinks fit.

Delivery to owner disputing legality of seizure, but making deposit-

If the owner or his agent appear and refuse to pay the said fines and expenses, on the ground that
the seizure was illegal, and that the owner is about to make a complaint under section 20, then
upon deposit of the fines and charges incurred in respect of the cattle, the cattle shall be delivered
to him.

Procedure when owner refuses of omits to pay the fines and expenses-

If the owner or his agent appear and refuse or omit to pay or to deposit the said fines and
expenses, the cattle, or as many of them as may be necessary, shall be sold by public auction by
such officer, at such place and time and subject to such conditions as are referred to in sec 14.

Delivery of unsold cattle and balance of proceeds:

9

The remaining cattle and the balance of the purchase- money, if any, shall be delivered to the
owner or his agent, together with an account showing-(a) the number of cattle seized,
(b) the time during which they have been impounded,
(c) the amount of fines and charges incurred,
(d) the number of cattle sold,
(e) the proceeds of sale, and
(f) the manner in which those proceeds have been disposed of,

Delivery of unsold cattle and balance of proceeds-

The owner or his agent shall give a receipt for the cattle delivered to him and for the balance of
the purchase-money (if any) paid to him according to such account.

Disposal of fines, expenses and surplus proceeds of sale-

The officer by whom the sale was made shall send to the Magistrate of the District the fines so
deducted. The charges for feedings and watering deducted under sec 16 shall be paid over to the
pound-keeper, who shall also retain and appropriate all sums received by him on account of such
charges under sec 13. The surplus unclaimed proceeds of the sale of cattle shall be sent to the
Magistrate of the District, who shall hold them in deposit for three months, and, if no claim
thereto be preferred and established within that period shall, at its expiry, be deemed to hold
them as part of the revenues of the State.

Officers and pound-keepers not to purchase cattle at sales under Act-

No officer of police, or other officer or pound keeper appointed under the provisions herein
contained shall, directly or indirectly, purchases any cattle at a sale under this Act.

Pound keepers when not to release impounded cattle-

No pound-keeper shall release or deliver any impounded cattle, unless such release or delivery is
ordered by a Magistrate or Civil Court.
10

5: COMPLAINTS OF ILLEGAL SEIZURE OR DETENTION:

Power to make complaints-

Any person whose cattle have been seized under this Act, or, having been so seized, have been
detained in contravention of this Act, may, at any time within ten days from the date of the
seizure, make a complaint to the Magistrate of the District or any Magistrate authorized to
receive and try charges without reference by the Magistrate of the District.

Procedure on complaint-

The complaint shall be made by the complainant in person, or by an agent personally acquainted
with the circumstances. It may be either in writing or verbal. If it be verbal, the substance of it
shall be taken down in writing by the Magistrate. If the Magistrate, on examining the
complainant or his agent, sees reason to believe the complainant to be well founded, he shall
summon the person complained against, and make an inquiry into the case.

Compensation for illegal seizure or detention-

If the seizure or detention be adjudged illegal, the Magistrate shall award to the complainant, for
the loss caused by the seizure or detention, reasonable compensation, not exceeding one hundred
rupees, to be paid by the person who made the seizure or detained the cattle, together with all
fines paid and expenses incurred by the complainant in procuring the release of the cattle, if the
cattle have not been released, the Magistrate shall, besides awarding such compensation, order
their release and direct that the fines and expenses leviable under this Act shall be paid by the
person who made the seizure or detained the cattle.

Recovery of compensation-

The compensation, fines and expenses mentioned in sec 22 may be recovered as if they were
fined imposed by the Magistrate.

6: PENALTIES:

Penalty for forcibly opposing the seizure of cattle of rescuing the same-

11

Whoever forcibly opposes the seizure of cattle liable to be seized under this Act, and whoever
rescues the same after seizure, either from a pound, or from any person taking or about to take
them to a pound, such person being near at hand and acting under the powers conferred by this
Act, shall, on conviction before a Magistrate, be punished with imprisonment for a period not
exceeding six months, or with fine not exceeding five hundred rupees, or with both.

Recovery of penalty for mischief committed by causing cattle to trespass-

Any fine imposed under the next following section or for the offence of mischief by causing
cattle to trespass on any land may be recovered by sale of all or any of the cattle by which the
trespass was committed, whether they were seized in the act of trespassing or not, and whether
they are the property of the person convicted of the offence, or were only his charge when the
trespass was committed.

Penalty on pound- keeper failing to perform duties

Any pound-keeper releasing or purchasing or delivering cattle contrary to the provisions of

section 19, or omitting to provide any impounded cattle with sufficient food and water, or failing
to perform any of the other duties imposed upon him by this Act, shall, over and above any other
penalty to which he may be liable, be punished, on conviction before a Magistrate, with fine not
exceeding fifty rupees. Such fines may be recovered by deductions from the pound-keepers
salary.

Application of fines recovered under sec 25,sec 26 or sec 27-

All fines recovered under section 25, section 26 or section 27 may be appropriated in whole or in
part as compensation for loss or damage proved to the satisfaction of the convicting Magistrate.

7: SUITS FOR COMPENSATION:

Saving of right to sue for compensation-

Nothing herein contained prohibits any person whose crops or other produce of land have been
damaged by trespass of cattle from suing for compensation in any competent Court.

Set-off12

Any compensation paid to such person under this Act by order of the convicting Magistrate shall
be set-off and deducted from any sum claimed by or awarded to him as compensation in such
suit.

8: SUPPLEMENTAL:

Power for State Government to transfer certain functions to local authority and
direct credit of surplus receipts to local fund

The State Government may, from time to time, by notification in the official Gazette, transfer to
any local authority, within any part of the territories under its administration in which this Act is
in operation, all or any of the functions of the State Government or the Magistrate of the District
under this Act, within the local area subject to the jurisdiction of the local authority.

9: SOME CASES RELATED TO CATTLE TRESPASS:

Buckle v. Holmes-

The defendants cat stayed strayed into the plaintiffs land and there it killed thirteen pigeons and
two bantams. Killing of the birds was not peculiar to this cat alone; therefore the liability under
the Scienter Rule did not arise. There was no liability even for cattle trespass because cat is no
Cattle for the purpose of this rule.

Ellis v. Loftus Iron Co.-

The defendants horse kicked and bit the plaintiffs mare through the wire fence which divided
their properties. This damage couldnt have been caused without the horses body having cross
the boundary. There was cattle trespass and the defendant was held liable without any proof of
knowledge of the vicous nature of the horse or negligence on the part of the defendant.

Theyer v. Purnell-

The defendants sheep trespassed on the plaintiffs land. They developed scab there and
conveyed the same to plaintiffs sheep. All these sheep were interned by the government. Even
though the defendant did not know about the infection of his sheep with the disease, he was held

13

liable for the loss to the plaintiff which was considered to be a natural consequence of the
trespass.
According to Lawrencen J. every owner of the sheep must be aware that his sheep are liable to
develop scab

Wormald v. Cole-

It has been held that the personal injuries caused to the occupier of the land by trespassing
animal even by its natural propensity will make the owner of the trespassing cattle liable. In that
case the plaintiff was knocked down and injured by the trespassing heifer belonging to the
defendant. The personal injuries to the plaintiff were considered to be the direct result of the
trespass and the defendant was held liable for the same.

Cox v. Burbidge-

The plaintiff, a young child was kicked and injured by the defendants horse, who trespassed on
the highway. This way a trespass only against the owner of the land over which the highway ran.,
the child was a mere user of the highway and it was held that towards him, the defendant could
not be liable unless scienter or negligence could be proved.

CONCLUSION:
The conclusion boils down to the fact that there is no difficulty if the animal belongs to the
category of `ferae naturae' (e.g., lion). The keeper shall be liable strictly for the damage done by
it even though he is not at fault. But the difficulty arises in those cases where the animal belongs
to the category of `mansuetoe naturae' (e.g., ass, cow, rams). In such a case if the animal has
some dangerous propensities, it will be transferred in the category of `ferae naturae'. Here the
keeper will be liable strictly, independently of negligence, if the plaintiff proves scienter i.e., the
defendant had the knowledge of the dangerous propensities of such animal.

14

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

http://admis.hp.nic.in/himpol/Citizen/LawLib/C36.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Criminal_Procedure,_1973

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trespass

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trespass

http://www.manupatrafast.in/pers/Personalized.aspx

Books:
Tort law by Nicholas.J. McBride and Roderick Bagshaw
Winfield and Johowicz by W.V.H.Rogers
Tort Law by Vera Bermingham
LAW OF TORTS BY Dr. R.K. Bangia

15