NATURE & DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS

A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO

RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERISTY OF LAW, PUNJAB

FOR THE FIRST SEMESTER OF B.A. LL.B. (HONS.)

Submitted To: Submitted By:

Dr. Sangeeta Taak Arjun Goyal

(Asst. Prof. of Torts) Roll No. 18002

RGNUL, Punjab Group No. 1

1|Page
 SUPERVISOR’S CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Mr. Arjun Goyal has successfully completed this project work
entitled “Law of Torts: Nature and Development of Law of Torts” under the guidance
and supervision of Dr. Sangeeta Taak. The report is the result of his efforts and
endeavours. The report is found worthy of acceptance as final project report for the
subject Law of Torts.

Dr. Sangeeta Taak

Assistant Prof. Of law

2|Page
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who have helped me
throughout my project. I am grateful to my teacher Dr. Sangeeta Taak for her nonstop
support for the project. Next I would like to thank the RGNUL library staff for
helping me finding the books related to my project. I wish to thank my parents for
their personal support which inspired me to go my own way.

At last but not the least I want to thank my friends who encouraged me and helped me
wherever I needed and finally God who made all the things possible for me to do till
the end.

3|Page
Table of Contents

CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................5
1.1 LAW...................................................................................................................5
1.2 HOW DID LAW OF TORTS CAME OUT AS SEPARATE FROM OTHERS?
....................................................................................................................................5
CHAPTER-2 NATURE AND HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF
TORTS...........................................................................................................................6
2.1 THE WORD TORT..............................................................................................6
2.2 MEANING OF TORT..........................................................................................6
2.3 DEFINITION OF TORT......................................................................................6
Salmond’s Definition..............................................................................................6
Winfield’s Definition..............................................................................................6
2.4 HOW DID THIS FRENCH WORD COME TO INDIA?....................................7
CHAPTER 3 DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS..............................................8
3.1 DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS- ROMAN LAW.................................8
Roman law of ‘Dialect’...........................................................................................8
3.2 DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS IN ENGLAND...................................8
3.3 DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS IN INDIA.....................................10
CHAPTER-4 THE LAW OF TORTS IN INDIA......................................................13
4.1 THE SITUATION OF LAW OF TORTS IN INDIA........................................13
4.2 REASONS FOR SLOW DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS IN INDIA.14
Psychology of fear:...............................................................................................16
Nature of civil and criminal redress:.....................................................................16
Lack of reporting:.................................................................................................16
CHAPTER -5 CONCLUSION..................................................................................17
BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................................................................................19
BOOKS.................................................................................................................19
WEBSITES...........................................................................................................19

4|Page
CHAPTER-1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 LAW

Concept and understanding of law has been varied with changing times. As times are
changing, the societal setup has changed and so is the concept of law. Law is basically
a body of rules concerned with maintenance of social order by regulating the conduct
of society. This instrument of regulation has undergone various changes from its
inception to the present times. In the most primitive times what regulated the people’s
conduct was nature. Slowly, as man organised itself into society a binding custom or
practice of the community became law. However, with development of civil societies
and evolution of states law nowadays include only those rules which are recognised
and enforceable by state.

Now, law is further segregated into two – Criminal Law and Civil Law. Civil law
seeks to protect the rights of persons by imposing civil liability on the wrongdoer i.e.
the defendant is to pay damages to the person wronged. On the other hand, the object
of Criminal law is to punish the offender who is convicted for an offence. Thus a suit
for debt recovery, breach of contract etc. being of civil nature, are decided under Civil
Law, whereas cases involving theft, kidnapping, rape, murder etc. invoke operation of
Criminal law because of their criminal nature.

1.2 HOW DID LAW OF TORTS CAME OUT AS SEPARATE FROM

OTHERS?

Historically, the concept of crime and tort and distinction between the two emerged
much later after the institution of kinship or the state came into existence. The
primitive societies did not recognise any distinction between law of crime and law of
torts and termed both as ‘Law of wrongs’. Prior to tenth century, English society
confused crimes with torts because the bond of family was far stronger than that of
community, the injured party and his kindred could avenge the wrong by private
vengeance and self-redress. It was only when state came into existence that civil law

5|Page
developed. But still legal remedy was seen as only an optional alternative to self
redress. Slowly, idea of compensation and so the civil law developed.1

CHAPTER-2 NATURE AND HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF

LAW OF TORTS

2.1 THE WORD TORT

Tort has a French origin. The root is ‘tortum’ in Latin which means twisted. It implies
a conduct which is tortuous or twisted. In English a similar word is wrong, dialect in
Roman, Jimha in Sanskrit which means crooked.

2.2 MEANING OF TORT

At a general level, tort is concerned with allocation of responsibility for losses which
are bound to occur in society. 2 The tort law is a body of rights, obligations and
remedies which the court uses to provide relief to those who have suffered due to
wrongful act of others.3 Thus tort law is the law which provides remedies for the civil
wrongs other than breach of contract and breach of trust.

2.3 DEFINITION OF TORT

Salmond’s Definition

Tort is a civil wrong which is redressible by an action of unliquidated damages and

which is other than a mere breach of trust and breach of contract.

Winfield’s Definition

Tortious liability arises from breach of duty which is primarily fixed by law. This
duty is towards the person generally and its breach is redressible by an action of
unliquidated damages.

1
N.V. Paranjape, Law of Torts, Central law agency, Allahabad, 2016
2
http://www.academia.edu/6871868/TORT_-
TOPIC_1_INTRODUCTION_Definition_Nature_and_Scope
3
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Tort+Law

6|Page
2.4 HOW DID THIS FRENCH WORD COME TO INDIA?

It came to India through England. In 1065, England was conquered by Normans who
were French speaking people of Normandy, a region of France. After Norman
Conquest French became the spoken language in courts of England and thus many
technical terms in English law owe their origin to French and tort is one of them. 4 And
because of colonialism of India by British Indian laws are influenced by British law.
So, the law of torts found its origin in India through England.

DEVELOPMENT OF TORTS THROUGH A TIMELINE

 Earlier: In the earlier days the state had little concern regarding individuals
and their interactions.
 1300s: The monarchy began to take an interest in individual interactions.
Trespass began the law of torts. However, a party wanting to bring an action
for trespass had to follow strict forms- their trespass must fit a writ.
 1400s: In response to the limitations of the writ system, “actions on the case”
developed. The appealed to a sense of justice, and developed into nuisance,
some others, and negligence.
o Early negligence could only apply to certain cases: Apothecaries,
doctors/surgeons, and other people who served the public in a
professional capacity, and for whom there was a general accepted
standard of appropriate conduct.
 Late 1700s: Negligence developed in a way that they could be indirect, as
opposed to the directness required by the trespass torts. Scott v. Sheppard is an
example of a trespass tort requiring directness.
 1800s: Instead of focusing on causation, courts began to see fault as most
important for actions on the case. With this shift in focus, it became less
necessary to restrict actions to the pre-set categories. There was an attempt to
develop a more general theory/principled approach the negligence.

4
http://www.academia.edu/6871868/TORT_-
TOPIC_1_INTRODUCTION_Definition_Nature_and_Scope

7|Page
CHAPTER 3 DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS

3.1 DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS- ROMAN LAW

Roman law of ‘Dialect’

The existence of the rudiments of modern tort law may be found in the ancient Roman
law of dialects. Dialects mean a private wrong for which proper remedy was award of
damages. But it included offences like theft and robbery which are not a part of
present day tort law.5

3.2 DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS IN ENGLAND

Prior to the French William the Conqueror’s 1066 Norman conquest of England, the
legal system was somewhat haphazard, conducted on a case-by-case basis. After
1066, eminent judges were delegated to travel about a given region in order to absorb
those village laws which had developed over two centuries. Benefiting by this
information, these judges noted and implemented precepts they deemed most fair-
minded into their own court findings. In time, when referred to often enough, these
cases became what are now called legal precedents. Once established, these
precedents were meant to be applied equally to every member of society.6

During this period, the laws were mainly concerned with the payment of pecuniary
compensation. Even the serious crimes were compensated this way instead of
punishment. However, after the Norman Conquest, during the reign of strong rulers
such as Henry II, courts were established to punish all forms of violence against the
king’s peace.7

The early common law was concerned mainly with the remedies and not with the
rights. Before the passing of Judicature Act, 1872 a proceeding in common law court
was called an ‘action’. The success of an action depended upon availability of writs.
Thus if no writ was available, action would fail even though it was otherwise justified.
The forms of action then available were of two types- (i) the action of trespass

5
N.V Paranjape, ‘Law of torts’, Central law agency, Allahabad, 2016 ,pp.4
6
https://owlcation.com/social-sciences/Evolution-of-Tort-Law
7
S.K. Kapoor, ‘Law of Torts & Consumer Protection Act ’, Central law Agency, Allahabad, pp 1

8|Page
(ii) action on the case.8 The main point of distinction between an act of trespass and
action on the case was that while the former lay for direct injury, the latter lay for
indirect or consequential injury.

The procedure followed for determining whether the plaintiff has a cause of action or
not was called writ system. Under the writ system the plaintiff had to comply with a
formality of obtaining a writ from the chancellor of exchequer for instituting a suit
against the defendant in a Common Law court. If the wrong called for a remedy the
chancellor would issue a writ entitling the plaintiff to file a suit against defendant in
common law court. However, if the wrong complained of was not recognised as a
wrongful act, no writ would be issued and in that case, the plaintiff had no remedy
though he might have a cause of action against the defendant. Also, the plaintiff could
not move the court without a writ having been issued by the chancellor for that
purpose. Thus where there was a writ, there was a remedy and has been expressed by
Latin maxim Ubi remedium ibi jus.9

In the initial stage, the authority of the chancellor to issue writ was confined to only a
very limited number of wrongs, notably injuries caused to person or property of the
plaintiff where writ called ‘action of trespass’ was issued. In course of time other
types of wrongs such as negligence, nuisance or disturbance in another’s possession
of chattel etc. also called for a remedy. But these were not included under action of
trespass; hence a writ could not be issued by chancellor as a result of which plaintiff’s
claim remains unredressed. It was therefore realised that the system of writs suffered
from certain defects and in most cases plaintiff whose right was violated had no
remedy against the defendant for want of availability of an appropriate writ. 10

This system laid greater emphasis on procedural aspect of the writ rather than the
violation of plaintiff’s right. To remove the discrepancies of this system Common
Law Procedure Act, 1852 was passed whereby primacy was given to plaintiff rather
than formality of the writ. Now it was not necessary for the plaintiff to mention any
particular action for which his cause of action was covered. He was only to file for a
writ and it was upon chancellor whether to grant a writ or not.

8
N.V Paranjape, ‘Law of torts’, Central law agency, Allahabad, 2016 ,pp.7
9
N.V Paranjape, ‘Law of Torts’, Central law Agency,2016, Allahabad pp.7
10
ibid

9|Page
However, after the Judicature Act, 1873 was passed the writ system was completely
abolished and plaintiff could file his plaint directly in the court without the
requirement of a writ or with the prior permission from the chancellor. This was based
on the idea that if one has a right, one should have means to maintain it and be
entitled to remedy in case he is injured by the violation of his rights. The principle is
where there is a right, there is a remedy or in other words where there is no right,
there is no right. The courts came forward with new torts wherever there has been an
unjustified interference with rights of a person. In course of time new torts like
defamation, nuisance, negligence, assault etc. were established.11

3.3 DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS IN INDIA

After English traders set foot on Indian soil they were authorized to exercise judicial
powers to govern their servants, i.e., servants of the East India Company according to
the laws of England. By the Charter of 1726, both common law and statute law of
England were introduced as they stood in 1726. By the Charter of 1774, the Supreme
Court at Calcutta was established and it applied English law to all persons residing
within its jurisdiction. Outside the Presidency town, the personal law of the parties
was administered in matters like adoption, inheritance, succession, marriage and
religious endowments. In other cases, courts were required to apply the doctrine of
justice, equity and good conscience. In case of torts, the courts tried to follow the
rules of common law based on equity, justice and good conscience. Any deviation
from English law was made only where its application was not considered proper.
After the establishment of High Courts by the Act of 1861, no major change has taken
place and even after India became independent, the status quo has been maintained by
providing for the continuance of existing law in article 300 of the Constitution. 12

The perception of law in ancient India was different from what it is today, it laid
greater emphasis on duties rather than rights of the persons. The man source of
ancient Hindu law i.e. Smritis give a detailed account of private wrongs and damages
prevalent in India. The right to recover compensation was recognised under three
heads (1) damage caused to crops by trespass of cattle (2) bodily injuries and,
(3) damage caused to goods whether intentionally or otherwise. There was no scope

11
N.V. Paranjape, Law of Torts, Central law agency, Allahabad, 2016 pp8.
12

10 | P a g e
of private vengeance in ancient scheme of justice. The digest prepared by
Viramitrodaya and Vyavahara Mayukha contain authorities details on a variety of
topics relating to law of private wrongs including injuries to person and property,
trespass, fraud, negligence, bailment, defences etc.13

The ancient Hindu Law of Torts however differed from the present law of torts in one
distinct aspect. It recognised right to compensation only in cases where plaintiff
suffered only monetary loss and not in other cases like assault, false imprisonment,
insult, adultery, defamation etc. These wrongs were seen as a punishable offence and
not as a wrong for which compensation could be awarded. Which form the subject of
modern law of torts.14

The 'Law of Torts' owes its origin to the Common Law of England. It is well

developed in the UK, USA and other advanced Countries. In India, Law of Torts is
non-codified, like other branches of law For Example: Indian Contract Act,
1872 and Indian Penal Code, 1860. It is still in the process of development. A tort can
take place either by commission of an act or by omission of an act.15

In India, tort law has been only in implementation since towards the end of the British
rule. However most of Tort Law has developed in India post the independence in
1947. Tort law in India is, for most part, based on English tort law, which is based on
the principle of common law. However, in Hindu Law and Muslim Law, the
definition of “tort” holds a much more myopic view than the system of tort law
implemented by the British. As per the Hindu and Muslim legal system, punishments
for crimes outlined in these systems hold a more important place than compensation
for the wrong16. 

 Tort law as a concept came to India around the late 1800’s when Sir Henry Maine
and Sir James Stephen stressed the need of a tort code in India. It was noted that the
presence of torts in India would be a huge blessing as it would aid the legislature
curtailing a lot of provisions of the Indian Penal Code. The law of torts in India is still
in its embryonic stage as far its development is concerned and where the statutes are
codified as well status which decides what is to be done in case of damage. Also,

13
S.K Kapoor, law of Torts, Central Law Agency, Allahabad, 2007, pp 5
14
ibid
15
http://www.lawnotes.in/Law_of_Torts
16
http://www.studymode.com/essays/History-Of-Tort-Law-In-India-57131844.html

11 | P a g e
while formulating India’s Tort law, special attention had been given to India’s Socio-
cultural practices as well as certain conditions were made in order in order to apply
foreign laws and ideologies in an Indian context. Furthermore, certain statutes have
also been created by the legislature to adapt to certain social conditions.17  

The courts generally followed the English common law so far as it was consonant
with equity, justice and good conscience. A departure was made when any particular
rule was found unreasonable or unsuitable to Indian Conditions. 18During British rule,
courts in India were enjoined by Acts of Parliament in the UK and by Indian
enactments to act according to justice, equity and good conscience if there was no
specific rule of enacted law applicable to the dispute in a suit. In regard to suits for
damages for torts, courts followed the English common law insofar as it was
consonant with justice, equity and good conscience. They departed from it when any
of its rules appeared unreasonable and unsuitable to Indian conditions. An English
statute dealing with tort law is not by its own force applicable to India but may be
followed here unless it is not accepted for the reason just mentioned. 19

In M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, Justice Bhagwati said, “we have to evolve new

principles and lay down new norms which will adequately deal with new problems
which arise in a highly industrialized economy. We cannot allow our judicial thinking
to be constructed by reference to the law as it prevails in England or for the matter of
that in any foreign country. We are certainly prepared to receive light from whatever
source it comes but we have to build our own jurisprudence.”20

In a more recent judgement of Jay Laxmi Salt Works (p) ltd. v. State of Gujarat,
Sahai, J., observed: truly speaking the entire law of torts is founded and structured on
morality. Therefore, it would be primitive to close strictly or close finally the ever
expanding and growing horizon of tortuous liability. Even for social development,
orderly growth of the society and cultural refineness the liberal approach to tortious
liability by court would be conducive.21

17
ibid
18
S.K. Kapoor, Law of Torts, Central law agency, Allahabad, pp 2
19
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l129-Torts-In-India.html
20
ibid
21
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/torts_s.htm

12 | P a g e
However, the application of tort laws in India is not a very regular event and one can
even go to the extent of commenting that tort as a law in India is far from being
looked upon as a major branch of law and litigation. In the Indian legal system, the
concept of ‘punishment’ occupies a more prominent place than ‘compensation’ for
wrongs. Under the Hindu law and the Muslim law, tort had a much narrower
conception. In India the term tort has been in existence since pre-independence era.
The Sanskrit word Jimha, which means crooked was used in ancient than the tort of
the English law. The punishment of crimes in these systems occupied a more
prominent place than compensation for wrongs. The application of the English law in
India has therefore been a selective application.22

CHAPTER-4 THE LAW OF TORTS IN INDIA

4.1 THE SITUATION OF LAW OF TORTS IN INDIA

Tort law in India enjoys the distinction of being the solitary uncodified law in the
municipal legal system. Modelled on the pre-independent British model it remains in
a nascent and underdeveloped stage. It has yet to cross primary thresholds such as
clarifying uniform parameters of compensation or diversifying negligence. Courts
continue to award compensation on simplistic understandings based primarily on the
degree of compromise to the earning ability of the victim on even more simplistic
formulations of negligence.23

The Courts in India have done very little for development of Law of Torts in India.
Even after 55 years of independence, the position of law of torts in India is just
deplorable. The Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster of December 2-3, 1984 brought into
limelight the lethargy, incompetence and apathy of the Indian courts in respect of the
development of law of tort in India. On 8th April 1985, Union of India filed a case
against Union Carbide Corporation in the United States District Court requesting
award of damages. On 6 December, 1985 in its Memorandum of Law in opposition to
Union Carbide Corporation’s Motion to dismiss the suit on grounds of Forum non

22
ibid
23
http://www.manupatrafast.com/articles/PopOpenArticle.aspx?ID=da4a712e-da28-445a-8190-
9b8367243539&txtsearch=Subject:%20Consumer

13 | P a g e
conveniences, the Union of India admitted the pathetic and deplorable state of Law of
Torts in India. The Union of India submitted, inter alia, that the Courts of India are
not an adequate alternative forum in which this litigation may be resolved; delays
inherent in the Indian Court System would lead to an unconscionable delay in the
resolution of these cases in India, and India’s Court system lack the procedural and
practical capability to handle this litigation.

The law of torts is based on precedents, but, in India for a variety of interrelated
reasons there is a paucity of useful precedents to deal with the cases. The
underdevelopment of tort law in India is because of institutional preference for
criminal remedies and of specific relief. In the Indian system,
punishments for crime is given more importance than compensation for wrongs.24

The subject of Law of Torts is well developed in countries like USA, UK etc. It is still
in the process of development and adaptation in India due to the lack of triple
activism.

1. Activism in People - In England and other advanced countries, people

approach court even for simple cases. However, in India because of poverty,
illiteracy, spirit of toleration and lack of legal know-how, the people are
reluctant to approach courts.
2. Activism in Judiciary - In India, the number of Courts and judicial offers is
very limited and the cost of litigation is highly expensive. There is an
inordinate delay in disposal of cases.
3. Activism in Legislature - British legislature passes legislation well in advance
wherever necessary.
Due to these reasons the tort law in India is still underdeveloped.25

4.2 REASONS FOR SLOW DEVELOPMENT OF LAW OF TORTS IN INDIA

24
S.K Kapoor, law of Torts, Central Law Agency, Allahabad, 2007, pp 3
25
http://www.lawnotes.in/Law_of_Torts_in_India

14 | P a g e
Various factors responsible for hampering luxuriant growth of law of torts in India are
explained below:

‘Cultural factors:

Spirituality has been the dominant note of Indian culture. 'Dharma' has for its
objective the attainment of temporal welfare through spiritual well-being. In India,
high regard is paid to 'duty which puts the concept of 'rights' in the shade. In the
absence of any assertion of right, the violation of duty could only draw objective
penal sanctions. Here the negative mental element of negligence finds difficulty in
securing recognition. Negligence which is the typical modern tort was not recognized
by the Dharamasastras. Further the wrongs of trespass to person, conversion,
defamation and other injuries to family relationship did not made people liable in civil
action. Such heritage as that of English law where injuries were classified and priced
was not available to Indian juristic thinkers. It was the duty of the king to award
damages but the aggrieved party had not right to demand them. Damages were
awarded only when there was actual damage. Non physical harm was not recognized
for the purpose of awarding damages. The category of exemplary damages could not
be built into the structure of tort. The doctrine of injury without damage could not
have been formulated. This explains why the Indian mind is more attuned to criminal
redress, and filing of civil action for assault, battery, mayhem, false imprisonment,
etc., rarely finds favour with Indian litigants today when those acts are already
punishable as crimes. The tort of malicious prosecution, which is only a mode of
revenge for criminal prosecution, is resorted to by the victorious party as the spoils of
victory and the largest number of cases of torts are those of malicious prosecution
where the plaintiff wants merely to teach a lesson rather than to get his injury repaid.
Now the Indian mind in this industrial age is dislodging itself slowly from its habitual
abode and the tort of negligence is likely to surpass malicious prosecution in the
context of a multitude of industrial establishments and ever increasing road and rail
traffic with their high accident potential.

15 | P a g e
Psychology of fear:

Courts of India could not inspire much confidence but scare people through fear. The
greater part of the people takes pride in the fact that they never saw the threshold of a
law court. They are very slow in realizing that the court is an effective third party
which can give redress to their wrongs and is potent enough to award those damages
for wrongful conduct towards them. Many disputes which would have developed the
legal doctrine in torts are settled out of court because of this psychology of fear. Thus
there is a lack of precedents which is the very proof of rudimentary stage of tort law
in India

Nature of civil and criminal redress:

The difference in the nature of civil and criminal redress is also responsible for
paucity of cases in torts. In cognizable offences the party has simply to lodge first
information report and the police prosecute the offenders generally. Private
complaints in criminal cases are few in number. Similarly, people are reluctant to file
civil suits where the cost of litigation has to be borne by them. Before the Britishers
established their courts or remodelled old ones, administration of justice was free, i.e.,
courts did not charge court-fee for dispensing justice. The court fee was imposed by
the British government in India and this mode of justice has proved a costly affair as
many honest litigants were dissuaded by this measure and litigation because a game
of the prosperous few. Also owing to rampant poverty in the country neither can the
litigants demand adequate compensation nor is the court inclined to award substantial
damages.

Lack of reporting:

All types of tort are in plentiful occurrence in India; but these cases are rarely
reported; first, they are settled out of court and secondly many cases are decided in
lower courts and for want of records of these decisions we infer that there is scarcity
of tort litigation in India. Many of these cases are finally determined in lower court
and do not reach the High Court level. Among the limited numbers which go to the
High Court only some are actually reported. On this analysis, the lack of tort litigation
26
is only so in appearance and not in reality.’ In a survey conducted, in the ten year
26
http://14.139.60.114:8080/jspui/bitstream/123456789/738/22/Law%20of%20Torts.pdf

16 | P a g e
period between 1975 and 1984 only 56 tort cases were reported by the Supreme Court
and High Courts.27

CHAPTER -5 CONCLUSION

The Law of Tort is not unnecessary but merely requires enactments to make it more
ascertainable. The reasons for slow development of this law in the country are failure
of the aggrieved person to assert his rights because of unawareness, delays in court
procedures, high court fees involved, psychological fear of approaching courts etc.
The elimination of difficulties which obstruct aggrieved parties in obtaining or
seeking remedies which the law offers them is a matter which is worthy of
consideration. If they are removed India could also witness a growth in Tort litigation.

The law of torts as against crimes is not enforced by police on the wrongdoers in the
court. It is a civil action taken by one individual against another. If instituting a case
requires high amounts then, in a country like India where poverty is still a major
problem people would be discouraged to file a case. So, there is a need to reduce this
court fee so that people whose rights have been infringed can file a case and seek
remedy. Precedents disclose that two suits of five hundred rupees each were decreed
for Rs. 60/- and Rs. 50/- respectively.28

In terms of time involved tort law the civil litigation is again a costly affair. A study
has shown that final outcome in tort litigation has taken in an average a period of six
years. The minimum time taken is five years and the maximum being thirteen and a
half years. The prohibitive cost of remedial action thus deters a potential plaintiff to
resort to civil litigation. 29Thus there is a need to improve the overall judicial system.

Also people in India are more inclined towards instituting a criminal case rather than
civil case. There is a need to create awareness among people about their right to
remedy in these cases. It is not that torts like assault, battery, nuisance, negligence
does not take place in the country, it is just that people are either unaware that there
exists a remedy against these wrongs or they are reluctant to approach the court. So,

27
S.K. Kapoor, law of torts, Central law agency, Allahabad, 2007, pp. 3
28
D.C. Pandey , Some reflections on problems of tort litigant in India, Mt. Abu, 1969
29
ibid

17 | P a g e
the legislature and judiciary needs to be active to bring more cases to the court and
impart justice to the aggrieved.

The law of torts is an effective measure but is still not developed in our country. The
active participation of judiciary, change in mindset of people and efforts on part of the
government can help in developing the law of torts in India.

18 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS
1. S.K Kapoor, law of Torts, Central Law Agency, Allahabad, 2007
2. N.V. Paranjape, Law of Torts, Central law agency, Allahabad,2016

WEBSITES
1. www.academia.edu
2. www.legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com
3. www.owlcation.com
4. www.lawnotes.in
5. www.studymode.com
6. www.legalserviceindia.com
7. www.manupatrafast.com

19 | P a g e