Define Tort and Law of Tort. Discuss its nature. What are its various ingredients? What conditions must be satisfied before a liability in Tort arises? "A tort is a civil injury but all civil injuries are not Torts". E!lain. Distinguish between Tort and "rime. #ow many $inds of Torts are there?The word tort has been derived from the latin word "tortum" which means to twist. In general, it means conduct that adversely affects the legal right of others and is thus, "wrong". For a healthy society it is necessary that it be free of anti-social elements and that an individual should have freedom to exercise his rights without being restricted by others. Further, if there is a transgression of any right, there must be a way to compensate or to restore the right. This is essentially what the maxim, "Ubi ust ibi remedium" implies. !here ever there is a right, there is a remedy. Indeed, a right has no value if there is no way to enforce it. "uch rights of individuals primarily originate from two sources - contractual obligations and inherent rights that are available to all the citi#ens against every other citi#en, a$a rights in rem. !hile the violation of contractual right has clear remedy that arises from the contract itself, the violation of rights that are available to all the persons in general does not have a clear remedy because there is no explicit contract between the two parties. "uch violations are called wrongs and it is for such wrongs that the law of torts has been developed. For example, one has a right against all other persons to be free of noise in the night. If somebody starts playing music loudly, then he violates one%s right to be noise free. &e is, thus, doing a wrong and even though there is no contract between the two, one can sue him for damages.There can be innumerable types of acts that can transgress the rights of others and it is not possible to come up with a definition that can accommodate all the cases.&owever, the following are some definitions from the experts - %almond - ' tort is a civil wrong for which the remedy is action in common law for unli(uidated damages and which is not exclusively a breach of contract or breach of trust or other e(uitable obligation. Winfield - Tortious liability arises from the breach of duty primarily affixed by law. The dutyis towards persons in general and its breach is redressable by an action for unli(uidated damages. &raser -Tort in an infringement of a right in rem of a private individual giving a right of compensation at the suit of the inured party.Thus, it can be seen that tort is an act while the law of tort is the branch of law that provides relief to the person who has been inured due to a tortious act.From the above definitions, it is clear that the nature of a tort is that it is a civil wrong. &owever, not all civil wrongs are torts. For example, breach of contract and breach or trust are civil wrongs but are not torts because their remedies exist in the contract itself. To determine if a particular act is a tort or not, we must first ma$e sure that it is a civil wrong. !e should then ma$e sure that it is )*T a breach of contract or breach of trust.&istorically, crime and tort originated from the same root. +ater on, they separated on the account that a crime does not only affect the victim but also to the society as a whole to a great extent. Thus, the branch of law that deals with criminal conduct evolved a lot faster thanthe branch of law that deals with torts. The nature of tort can be understood by distinguishing it from crime and contractual civil liabilities. It can be said that tort is the residual of wrongful acts that are not crime and that donot fall under contractual liabilities. Thus, if a wrongful act is neither crime nor a violation of a contract, it may fall under tort. The damages are unli(uidated and are decided only by the common sense of the courts. The following differences between Tort and ,rime and Tort and -reach of ,ontract, shows the true nature of Tort.

Distinction between Tort and 'reach of "ontractTort 'reach of "ontractTort occurs when the right available to all the persons in general .right in rem/ is violated without the existence of any contract.' breach of contract occurs due to a breach of a duty .right in persona/agreed upon by the parties themselves.0ictim is compensated for unli(uidated damages as per the udgment of the udges. Thus, damages are always unli(uidated.0ictim is compensated as per the termsof the contract and damages are usually li(uidated.1uty is fixed by the law of the land and is towards all the persons.1uty towards each other is affixed by the contract agreed to by the parties.1octrine of privity of contract does not apply because there is no contract between the parties. This was held in the case of Donaghue vs %tevenson ()*+. *nly the parties within the privity of contract can initiate the suit.Tort applies even in cases where a contract is void. For example, a minor may be liable in Tort.!hen a contract is void, there is no (uestion of compensation. For example, a contract with a minor is void ab initio and so a minor cannot beheld liable for anything.2ustice is met by compensating the victim for his inury and exemplary damages may also be awardedto the victim.In 'him %ingh vs %tate of , - A./ ()01 - the plaintiff was awarded exemplary damages for violation of his rights given by art 34. 2ustice is met only by compensating the victim for actual loss.In the case of Donaghue vs %tevenson ()*+, ' purchased ginger beer in a restaurant for his woman friend. "he dran$ a part of it and poured the rest into a glass. Thereby, she saw a dead snail in the drin$. "he sued the manufacturer. It was held that the manufacturer had a duty towards the public in general for ma$ing sure there are no noxious things in the drin$ even though there was no contract between the purchaser and the manufacturer.The same principal was applied in the case of -laus 2ittelbachert vs East .ndia #otels Ltd A./ ())3. In this case, +ufthansa 'irlines had a contract with &otel *beroi Intercontinental for the stay of its crew. *ne of the co-pilots was staying there too$ a dive in the pool. The pool design was defective and the person%s head hit the bottom. &e was paraly#ed and died after 45 yrs. The defendants pleaded that he was a stranger to the contract.It was held that he could sue even for the breach of contract as he was the beneficiary of the contract. &e could also sue in torts where plea of stranger to contract is irrelevant. The hotel was held liable for compensation even though there was no contract between the person and the hotel and the hotel was made to pay 67+acs as exemplary damages.Distinction between Tort and "rimeTort "rimeTort occurs when the right available to all the persons in general .right in rem/ is violated without the existence of any contract.Tort occurs when the right availableto all the persons in general .right inrem/ is violated and it also seriouslyaffects the society.'ct is comparatively less serious and affects only the person.'ct is comparatively more serious and affects the person as well as the society.Intention is usually irrelevant.Intention is the most important element in establishing criminal liability. ' crime cannot happen without 8ens 9ea.It is a private wrong. It is a public wrong."ince it is a private wrong the wronged individual mustfile a suit himself for damages."ince it is a public wrong, the suit isfiled by the govt.The suit is for damages. The suit is for punishment.,ompromise is possible between the parties. For example, a person who has been defamed, can compromise with the defamer for a certain sum of money.There is no compromise for the punishment. For example, if a person is guilty of murder, he cannot pay money and reduce his sentence.,ompounding is possible.,ompounding is generally not possible.2ustice is met by compensating the victim for his inuryand exemplary damages may also be awarded to the victim. In 'him %ingh vs %tate of , - A./ ()01 - the plaintiff was awarded exemplary damages for violationof his rights given by art 34.2ustice is met by punishing the aggressor by prison or fine. In somespecific cases as given in I:, compensation may be given to the victim.Tortious acts are usually not criminal acts."everal criminal acts such as assaultand battery are also grounds for tortious suit. .ngredients of Tort 4"onditions that must be satisfied before a liability in Tort arises.5There are three essential elements for an act to be liable under Tort.(. Wrongful act or omission - There must be some act or omission of a duty on the part of the defendant. For a tort to happen, the person must have first either done something that he was not expected to do or omitted to do something that he was supposed to do.2unici!al "or! of Delhi vs %ubhagvanti A./ ()11 - ' cloc$ tower was not in goodrepairs. It fell and $illed several people. 8,1 was held liable for its omission.+. Duty im!osed by law - The act or omission of an action must be re(uired by law or the duty must be imposed by law.This means that if an act that is prohibited by law causes harm, it is liable under tort. "imilarly, if the omission of an act that is re(uired by law, causes harm, then it is liable under tort. For example, law re(uires that the driver of a vehicle must drive carefully and if driving without care, a pedestrian is hit, the omission of the act of driving carefuly is liable under tort. &owever, if the worshipers stop going to a temple and thereby cause the priest to lose money, this action is not liable under tort because going to temple is not an act that is re(uired by law. "uch duties that are re(uired by law are usually towards all the people in general. Donaghue vs %tevenson ()*+ -&eld that the manufacturer of a drin$ has a legal duty towards the consumers to ensure that noxious substances are not included in the drin$. *. .njury 6 The act or the omission must result in legal damage or inury i.e. violation of a legal right vested in the plaintiff. This means that the act or omission must cause a damage that is recogni#ed by law as wrongful. For example, a person has a legal right to enoy his property and if someone throws trash in it, this is a violation of his legal right and is liable under tort. &owever, it is possible that a legal right is violated without causing any physical or real damage. This is explained in the maxim - Inuria "ine 1amno..njuria %ine Damno 6 Ashby vs White (37* - The defendant wrongfully prevented the plaintiff from voting.;ven though there was no damage, the defendant was held liable.'him %ingh vs %tate of , - A./ ()01 - :laintiff was an 8+' and was wrongfully arrested while going to assembly session. &e was not produced before a magistrate within there(uisite period.It was held that this was the violation of his fundamental rights. ;ven though he was release later, he was awarded 67,7779" as exemplary damages by ",.*n the other hand, it is possible that a person suffers a huge loss or damage but none of his legal rights are violated. This is called 1amnum sine Inuria. In such cases, there is no tortious act.Damnum %ine .njuria 6 8laucester 8rammar %chool9s case 4