Tort is a french term which is equivalent to the English term 'wrong': origin of the word "Tort-Torturm. (Latin word Meaning twisted)

Everyone is expected to behave in straight forward manner and when one deviates from this staight path into crooked ways he has committed a Tort

Deflation of Toxt
Salmond = It is a civil wrong for which the remedy is a common law action for unliquidated damages and which is not exclusively the breach of a contract or the breach of a turst or other merely equitable obligation.

Winfield:- Toutious liability arises from the breach of a duty primarily fixed by the law this duty is towards Person generally and it's beach is redressable by an action for unliquidated damages.

Fraser: 'It is an infringement of a right in rem of a in private individual giving a right of a compensation at the suit of the injured party.
Firstly every Tort is a civil wrong,
Secondly every civil wrong is not a Tort

The definition of a Tort in the limitation Act 1963 is also residuary
Section 2(m), the limitation Act 1963. "Tort means civil wrong which is not exclusively a brach of contract or breach of trust

Difference:
Tort v.crime v. Breach of contract Trust
It is a Breach of Duty! The law imposes a duty to respect. the legal nights vested in the members of the society. and the person making breach of that duty is said to have done the wrongful act.

"Crime" is a wrongful act, which results from the breach of a duty recognized by criminal law.

Breach of contract is the non- performance of a duty undertaken by a party, to a contract

Tort is a breach of duty recognized under the law of Tort

It is a private wrong which mean action against the Tort - feasor wrongdoer" is bought to the court by the injured party

Tort is a Private wrong that contravenes the legal right of individual or group.

It is a civil wrong and Tort litigation is compoundable which means that the complainant can withdraw th suit filed by him.

The damages n Torts are unliquidated which means they are not Pre decided.

Example of both Tort and crime:

• Defamations
• Negligence
• Conspiracy
   

Tort v. Torts
The law of Tort i.e, every wrongful act for which there is no justification or excuse to be treated as a -Tort (Winfield)

The law of Torts consisting only of a number of specific wrongs beyond which the liability under this breach of

law cannot arise (salmand, Pigeon- Hole "Theory)

General Principles Of Tortuous Liability:
Essential of Tort

• Injuria Sine Damnum
• Damnum Sine Injuria.

Essential of Tort
Tort is an umbrella term and different diverse wrongs are included in it which originated and developed independently So there is no universal definition for all Torts.

The common essentials fon Tortitious liability Act or omission on parit of difendant & Such Act or omision leading to injury i.e, violation. of a legal right.

The Injuria Sine Damnum - Damnum sine Injurie

Injuria: Means infringement of a legal right

Damnum: Means substantial harm loss or damage in respect of Money comfort health or the like.
Sine: Means without

Injuria Sine Damnum
When there has been injuria or the violation of a legal right and the same has not been coupled with a damnum or harm to the plaintiff the plaintiff can still go to the court of law because no violation of a legal right should go unredressed

Ashby vs White Facts:

1. Ashby (plaintiff), resident of Aylesbury. Mr. White (defendant), a constable.
2. White prevented Ashby from exercising his 'Right to Vote', stating that Ashby wasn't a settled resident.
3. Ashby refused to accept it and said he was a registered voter. Ashby sued Mr. White for the claim of damages.

Contentions:

1. Ashby-My right to vote should be upheld. Compensation should be paid to me as injury (legal) happened.
2. Mr. White-No injury inflicted, as there was no physical harm by the defendant.

Ashby vs White Ratio & Decision:
Justice Holt

1. Lower Court � decreed in favor of the plaintiff and awarded compensation of 5 pounds.
2. Queen's Court � set aside the decision of the lower court.
3. House of Lords � upheld the Lower Court's decision. The court stated that injuria sine damnum will apply in this case, as there was a violation of legal rights, even though there were no physical damages done to the plaintiff. And as per ubi jus ibi remedium, in violation of legal rights, a remedy must be given.

Damnum sine injuria
When there is no violation of a legal right no action can lie in a court of law even though the defendant's act has caused some loss or damages on plaintiff

• Gloucester v. Grammar Case
• Town Area Committee v. Prabhu Dayal

Town Area Committee v. Prabhu Dayal
Facts:
Plaintiff constructed 16 shops on Garhi (a building) giving no notice under Section 178 to the Authority and without obtaining necessary Sanction under Section 180 of UP Municipal Act.

Defendants demolished these constructions when the plaintiff was out of town.

1st Notice under Section 186 & 302 of UP Municipal Act was served to plaintiff on 18th December (while the construction was going on) to stop the further construction.

They served 2nd Notice on 21st December to plaintiff, by which DM directed Town Area Committee to demolish the construction if the plaintiff does not comply with it, to stop construction within 2 hours of serving of the notice.

Previously, Lower appellate Court decided in favor of Plaintiff where Plaintiff contended they should pay damages to him because of mala fide intention of the Defendant.

The mala fide intention was proved by the plaintiff claiming the notice to be bad as they gave only 2 hours to the Plaintiff to stop the construction. Written By: Sakshi Parihar