Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 25


PROJECT WORK ON- Legal Remedies in Tort


Submitted BySudhakar Mishra
Roll No.- 970
B.A. LLB 1st Sem

In a students academic journey, project writing is one of the most significant challenges that a
student faces. I am presenting this project but this would not have been possible without the
guidance and blessings of so many people.
I take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude and deep regards to my guide Mr.
Harish Salve for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant encouragement throughout the
course of this project. The blessing, help and guidance given by him time to time shall carry me a
long way in the journey of life on which I am about to embark.
I take this opportunity to thank all my seniors and for their constant support and guidance
throughout the making of my project.
I also take this opportunity to thank our college librarian for his constant help in finding and
providing books on the topic. I would take this opportunity to thank the staffs at Khudabaksh
library, Patna for their help in finding materials on the topic.
Lastly, I thank almighty, my parents, brother, sisters and friends for their constant encouragement
without which this assignment would not be possible.

Table of Cases




3.Injunction and specific restitution of property


4.Constitutional and Extra judicial remedies







A.I.R.- All India Reporter

S.C.I Supreme Court of India
H.C.- High Court
J.- Justice
V.- versus
Govt.- Government
Art.- Article
Sec.- Section

Table of Cases
1.Constantine v. Imperial London Hotels Ltd
2.Ashby v. White
3. Bhim Singh v. State of Jammu and Kashmir
4. Subhash Chander v. Ram Singh
5.Y.S. Kumar v. Kuldip Singh
6. Laxminarayan v. Sumitra Bai
7. Gobald Motor Service Ltd. V. Veluswami

Legal Remedies in Tort

As defined in Blacks Law Dictionary, a remedy is the means by which a right is enforced or the
violation of a right is prevented, redressed, or compensated. The word remedy in a legal
context has virtually the same meaning in a medical context, namely, to cure. In a legal context
remedy cures the violation of a legal right. The rule of law requires that wrongs should not
remain unredressed. All individuals or persons committing wrongs should be liable in an action
for damages for breach of civil law or for criminal punishment. The law of tort is founded on the
principle that every injury must have a remedy.1 Under the old English law a man could be said
to have a right only if there existed a recognized procedure allowing him a remedy. This is not so
in civil law systems. The terms rights and remedies are not equivalent of each other. One must
remember that a remedial right arising on breach of a primary right is as much a legal right as the
primary right. Procedural law merely deals with machinery which declares and makes effective
the remedial right.2 Remedies make good the default of one party. They differ from penalties,
punishments and sanctions. In the other words of John Burke3 remedy is the means by which
the violation of a right is prevented, redressed or compensated. Remedies are most necessary in
tort. After the tort is committed then thereafter to restore the person to previous situation there
are certain remedies available to people in cases of tort. Remedies are provided in proportion to
the harm suffered by the plaintiff. A large part of any tort lawsuit is set side for deciding which
type of remedy is appropriate for the victim. Generally speaking, restitutionary and equitable
remedies are not available if legal damages will be claimed by the plaintiff. That is, if a
monetary payment will make the plaintiff whole, then there is no need for a court to issue
restitutionary or equitable remedies.

1 Kiranbala Dandpat v. Secy., Grid Corpn. Of Orissa Ltd., AIR 1998 Ori 159.
2 Walker: The Oxford Companion to Law, 1980, p.105.
3 Burke: Osborns Concise Law Dictionary, 1976, 6 th Edn., p.285

There are mainly two kinds of remedies for torts, namely, judicial and extra-judicial. Judicial
remedies are remedies which are afforded by the courts of law; while extra judicial remedies are
those which are available to a party, in certain cases of torts, by his own acts alone. Extra judicial
remedies are expulsion of trespass, re-entry on land, reception of goods, distress damage feasant,

and abatement of nuisance. But these remedies, which are in the nature of self-help, should not
be normally resorted to, for the person resorting to them may frequently exceed his rights and
may be faced with a case civil or criminal alleging that he took the law in his own hands. It may
also create problems of law and order. Judicial remedies are awarding of damages, granting of
injunction, and specific restitution of property. Damages and injunction are merely two different
forms of the remedies against the same wrong; and the facts which must be proved in order to
entitle a plaintiff to the first of these remedies are equally necessary in the second.
There is a maxim called ubi jus ibi remedium which means where there is a right there is a
remedy. It means whenever there is an infringement of right of a person there is some remedy
which will be available to him. The two principal remedies available to the victim of a tort are
damages to compensate for the harm he has suffered and, where appropriate, an injunction to
prevent future harm. Damages is the predominant remedy. Certain forms of self-help, such as
abatement of a nuisance or self-defence, can be regarded as remedies, but the courts do not
encourage this. Remedies are available in different type like there is Damages, Injunction,
Specific restitution of property, they are provided as per the situation that which remedy will be
more beneficial to the sufferer. Remedies is much essential, because if there will be no remedy
then the sufferer will lose his confidence and the wrongdoer will go easily and will try to commit
the same act again and again.
Aim and Objective
Throgh this project we will try:
-To know about different remedies available in tort

To know which remedy should be available in different situation

In this project doctrinal method will be used in which help of internet, books, and other text will
be used.

Remedies are essential part of tort, they are given according to the quantum of damage or injury
suffered by the person, in different situations different types of remedies are available.

Damages, which here means unliquidated damages are the primary relief in an action for a tort.
Damages are the pecuniary compensation payable by one person to another for injury, loss or
damage caused by one person to another for injury, loss or damage caused by one to the other by
breach of legal duty or commission of tort. They are distinguished general damages,
compensation for the tort presumed to flow from a breach of contract or a tort, and special
damages, compensation for particular losses not presumed but which in fact have followed in a
particular case; the latter must be specially claimed and strictly proved. In simple words General
damages are the pecuniary reparation for the damage which is presumed to follow from the
injury,4 and special damages are the pecuniary equivalent of the actual loss sustained. Damages
may also be unliquidated, i.e. uncertain till fixed by the judgment of the court, or liquidated, of a
sum agreed by the parties and payable in the event of breach of duty by the party in breach. The
general rule is that the damages to which a claimant is entitled from the defendant in respect of a
wrongful act must be recovered once and for all. Damages are of different kinds which is further
discussed in this chapter.
Types of Damages
a)Contemptuous damages
As the very name suggests such damages are expressive of ridicule or scorn; they consist of what
is called derisory amount marking a disapproval of the plaintiffs conduct in going to court. The
amount awarded is very trifling because the courts forms a low opinion of the plaintiffs claim
and thinks that the plaintiff although has suffered greater loss, does not deserve to be fully
compensated. Damages of this kind may imperil the claimants chances of getting his costs, for
although costs now usually follow the event of the action, yet this award is in the discretion of
the judge, and although the insignificance of damages is not by itself necessarily enough to
4 New Hindustan Bank v Amritsar Pathankot Transport AIR 1958 Pun 348

justify him in depriving the claimant of his costs, yet it is a material factor in the exercise of his
discretion. Where there is a jury it is impressible for it to be influenced on the quantum of
damages by the likely outcome as to costs and the judge should decline to answer questions on
the subject.5 For instance, the reason for the defendants battery against the plaintiff is found to
be some offensive remark by the plaintiff.
b)Nominal Damages
Nominal damages are awarded when the claimants legal right has been infringed, his conduct is
not open to criticism in the above sense, he has suffered no actual damage, but he still has a
complete cause of action because the tort is actionable per se, for example, trespass to land, or
because his cause of action is breach of contract. These damages represent an award of a trivial
sum of money, such as fifty pence, as damages in recognition of the fact that technically there
has been an infringement of a right vested in the plaintiff but also indicating that no discernible
loss has been established. Such damages are frequently awarded where the court or jury takes the
view that, technically, the plaintiff was wronged but it has found a very low opinion of his
conduct and of the real merits of his claim. 6 They are given where the plaintiff in an action for an
invasion of his right establishes his right but does not show that he has sustained any damage.
Such damages can be distinguished from contemptuous damages in that, in the latter the plaintiff
ought never to have brought the suit, while in the former the suit is filed for the purpose of
vindication of ones right, leaving aside the question of money compensation as less important. A
important case regarding nominal damage is Constantine v. Imperial London Hotels Ltd.7

Constantine v. Imperial London Hotels Ltd.

5 Pamplin v. Express Newspaper Ltd. [1988] 1 W.L.R. 116.

6 Walker: Oxford Companion to Law, 1980, p.883.
7 Constantine v. I.L. Hotels, (1944) KB 693

Fact- The plaintiff, a famous West Indian cricketer was not accommodated room where he
wished to stay. The defendant that is the hotel authority provided him with lodging in another of
their hotels. The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant.
Issue- Whether the plaintiffs legal has been violated?
Held- It was held that though plaintiff has suffered no loss, his legal right has been infringed and
he was entitled to nominal damages of five guineas.

One more important case related to nominal damages is of Ashby v. White.8

Ashby v. White
Fact- The returning officer has wrongfully disallowed a qualified voter to vote at a parliamentary
election. However the candidate for whom he wanted to vote won the election in spite of that he
filed a suit.
Issue- Whether the defendant has violated the plaintiffs right by disallowing him to vote.
Held- It was held that though the plaintiff did not suffered any loss because the candidate for
whom he wanted to vote won the election, defendant will be liable , irrespective of that. Plaintiff
was awarded nominal damages.
c) Ordinary damages
Ordinary damages represent actual loss whether great or small, as opposed to nominal damages.
The damages are termed as compensatory because the award of damages has to be real and fair
in consideration of the loss suffered by the plaintiff. But the aim of law is compensation of the
loss and not the restitution or restoration. 9 When an injury is to be compensated by damages, in
settling the sum of money given for reparation or damages, one should as nearly as possible get
at that sum of money, which would put the party injured in the same position as he would have
8 (1703) 2 Lord Rayam, 938.
9 Lotus Line(P) Ltd. V. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1965 SC 1314.

been if he had sustained the wrong for which he is now getting the compensation or reparation.
The plaintiffs own estimate of the damage suffered is recorded as the maximum limit of such
compensation. For example, where a surveyor negligently surveyed a property which the
plaintiff purchased the proper measure of damages is the amount of money which will put the
plaintiff into as good position as if the surveying contract had been properly fulfilled. In other
words the proper amount of damages would be the difference between the market value of the
property without the defects and its value with the defects at the date of purchase. When the
plaintiffs injury is aggravated by the conduct and motives of the defendant, the damages may be

corresponding increased. But the damages so increased or aggravated are really compensatory
and fall in the class of ordinary damages.
d) Exemplary damages
When the damages awarded are in excess of the material loss suffered by the plaintiff with a
view to prevent similar behavior in future, the damages are known as exemplary damages.
Exemplary damages are also known as vindictive, punitive, or retributory damages. They are
given not merely as pecuniary compensation for the loss actually sustained by the plaintiff but
also as a kind of punishment to the defendant with a view of preventing similar wrongs in future,
as in actions for malicious injuries, fraud, oppression, continuing nuisance etc.10
It was held by Lord Devlin that such damages can be allowed only in the following three cases:
a) Where the damage has been caused by oppressive, arbitrary, unconstitutional action by
the servants of the government and it did not extend to oppressive action by private
corporations or individuals;
b) Where the defendants conduct has been calculated by him to make a profit for himself
which may well exceed the compensation payable to the plaintiff. Exemplary damages
can be properly be awarded whenever it is necessary to teach a wrongdoer that the tort
does not pay.
c) Where exemplary damages are expressly authorized by the statute.
One of the famous case regarding exemplary damages is as follows:
10 Walker: The Oxford Companion to Law, 1980,p.450.

Bhim Singh v. State of Jammu and Kashmir11

Fact- Bhim Singh, a member of Legislative Assembly was arrested and detained to prevent him
from attending the assembly session. The detention was challenged in the supreme court through
a writ petition but by the time of the decision, Bhim Singh had been set free.
Issue- As he was set free now, should he be awarded damages.

Held- It was held that though there was no need to order that he be set at liberty but the supreme
court considered it to be an appropriate case for awarding exemplary damages amounting to Rs.
d) Prospective damages- Prospective damages means compensation for damage which is
quite likely the result of the defendants wrongful act but which has not actually resulted
at the time of the decision of the case. For example, if a person has been crippled in an
accident, the damages to be awarded to him may not only include the loss suffered by
him up to the date of the action but also future likely damage to him in respect of that
Subhash Chander v. Ram Singh12
Fact- In this case the appellant, Subhash Chander, aged about 7 years, was hit by a bus
belonging to the State of Punjab and driven by the respondent, Ram Singh. He suffered various
injuries resulting in permanent disability, as a result of which he could not then walk without a
surgical shoe. He also, because of that disability, could not take employement in certain avenues.
Issue- Whether he should be given prospective damages.
11 A.I.R. 1986 S.C. 494.
12 A.I.R. 1972 Delhi 189.

Held- The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded him compensation amounting to Rs.3,000
under the heading probable future loss by reason of incapacity and diminished capacity of
work. The amount of compensation so awarded by the Tribunal was increased by the Delhi
High Court to Rs.7,500.

Y.S. Kumar v. Kuldip Singh13

Fact- The respondent, who was Excise and Taxation Officer, was hit by a motor cycle, resulting
in physical injuries at the ankle. Because of the injuries, he suffered permanent disability which
affected enjoyment of his normal life.
Issue- Whether prospective damages should be awarded or not.
Held- He was awarded compensation of Rs.7200 calculated at Rs.50 per month for a period of
12 years on account of physical disability and loss of enjoyment of normal life.
Measure of Damages for Personal Injury
When there is personal injury, compensation may be given under the following heads14:
1)Personal pain and suffering and loss of enjoyment of life;
2)Actual pecuniary loss resulting in any expenses reasonably incurred by the plaintiff; and
3)The probable future loss of income by reason of incapacity or diminished capacity for work.
13 A.I.R. 1972 Punjab and Haryana 326.
14 Ranjit Singh v. Meenaxiben, (1972) 13 Guj. L.R. 662

Damages are awarded for the pain and suffering and the court takes into account the suffering in
the past as well as in the future. Damages under this head not only include physical pain but also
mental agony due to the plaintiffs knowledge of the fact of the shortening of his expectation of
life. If the plaintiff dies before bringing the action, his legal representative can recover
compensation under this head.
Laxminarayan v. Sumitra Bai
Fact- The defendant lured the plaintiff girl to have sexual relations with him under the garb of
promise to marry. After the girl became pregnant, he refused to marry the girl.

Issue- Whether damages will be awarded regarding taking in account of personal injury suffered
by plaintiff.

Held- The plaintiff was held entitled to substantial damages on account of physical pain,
indignity, chances of marriage becoming dim and social stigma. It was also held that mere
acquittal of the boy and others in criminal case do not bar an action under law of torts.
Damages in case of shortening of expectation of life
When a persons normal span of life is shortened due to the negligence of the defendant, he can
claim compensation for the same. In case, he dies before claiming compensation under this head,
the right to claim compensation devolves on the legal representatives and they can claim
compensation on behalf of the deceased. The damages thus awarded are for loss to the estate of
the deceased. Such damages are for pain and suffering, loss of earnings and other damages
actually suffered by the victim including loss to personal property and loss of expectation of life,
between the date of accident and the moment of death.15
15 Vanguard Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Chellu Henumantha Rao, (1975) An. W.R.

Gobald Motor Service Ltd. V. Veluswami16

The plaintiff, Rajarathnam , aged 34 years met with an accident. He died three days after that.
He was well settled in business as a doctor and was living in comfort. The Supreme Court
awarded a sum of Rs. 5000 as compensation for mental suffering and loss of expectation of life.
Mitigation of Damage
A plaintiff who sues in a tort action cannot claim damages for that loss which he may have
avoided by taking a reasonable step. The principle is similar to that applied in an actions for
breaches of contract. The question of reasonableness is a question of fact. In Selvanayagam v.
University of West Indies, the Privy Council laid down that a plaintiff in an action for damages
for personal injuries who rejects a medical advice in favour of surgery must, in order to discharge
the burden on him of proving that he acted reasonably in regard to his duty to mitigate his
damage prove that in all the circumstance including in particular the medical advice, he acted
reasonably in refusing surgery. It has been accepted by the Privy Council that the decision in
Selvanayagam is not an accurate statement of the law and had given rise to a lot of criticism .

Lord Bingham in that context quoted with approval the following observation of Donaldson
M.R. in Sotiros Shipping Inc. v. Sameiet Solholt, The Solholt. A plaintiff is under no duty to
mitigate his loss, despite the habitual use by the lawyers of the duty to mitigate. He is
completely free to act as he judges to be in his best interests. On the other hand, a defendant is
not liable for all loss suffered by the plaintiff in consequence of his so acting. A defendant is only
liable for such part of the plaintiffs loss as is properly, to be regarded as caused by the
defendants breach of duty.

16 A.I.R. 1962 S.C. 1.


3.Injunction and Specific Restitution of Property

An Injunction is an order made by the court forbidding a person or class of persons from doing
a certain act, or acts of a certain class, upon pain of going to prison as contemnors of the court.
The penalty is not mention in the injunction, but if knowing of an injunction you break it, then
the curt has a large discretionary power of sending you to prison and keeping you there. 17The
object of injunction is usually preventive, rather than prohibitive. The order made by an
injunction is more authoritative than a direction. Prohibition is wholly negative and commands
not to do. When an injunction is granted to prevent a threatened wrong, it is called a quia timet
injunction, i.e. prevention before an event takes place. To entitle a party to an injunction he must
prove either damage or apprehended damage involving imminent damage of a substantial kind.18
In India the right to an injunction is governed by the Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 36 to 42.
Classification of Injunction
Injunctions may be classified in relation to the stage at which they are granted:
17 Maitland: Lectures on Equity, p.318.
18 Mahado v. Narayan Raoji Rao, (1904) 6 Bom LR 123.

Final injunctions can be granted at the end of a full trial and hearing in the matter.
Interim injunctions may be granted before the end of a full trial and hearing and even before
proceedings have properly commenced. In order for an interim injunction to be granted the court
must find that "the balance of convenience" is satisfied (it would harm the claimant more to go
on without the injunction than it would harm the defendant to grant it).
Without notice
In extreme emergencies the claimant may apply for a short temporary injunction (lasting a few
days) without informing the other side. A full hearing will be held before the injunction ends, so
the court may hear the arguments.

With notice
A claimant must give the other side is given notice of an application being made to obtain an
injunction and both parties will be heard at the hearing.
Injunctions can be further divided into different types:
The court order forbids the defendant from continuing to act in a particular way.
The court order requires the defendant to take action to rectify the consequences of their act.
Quia timet
The court order aims to prevent an apprehended legal wrong. These are very unusual and
require the claimant to prove that: the damage is near certain to occur, the damage is imminent
and that the defendant will not be restrained without the court order.
Specific Restitution of Property


When the plaintiff has been wrongfully dispossessed of his movable or immovable property, the
court may order that the specific property should be restored back to the plaintiff. For this
purpose the provisions of Sections 6 and 7 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 may be referred.
a) Action for ejectment
Section 6 and 7 of the Specific Relief Act provide a speedy and summary remedy through the
civil court for restoration of possession to the dispossessed. The Supreme Court of India has
laid down19 that in a suit under this section the plaintiff could maintain a suit based on prior
possession without proof of his title and could eject the trespasser.
b)Action for detention
Section 7 is for recovery of specific movable property. In regard to movable property or
goods there are three torts: trespass, detention and conversion. Detention is a kind of
conversion consisting in wrongfully detaining from the plaintiff goods to the immediate
possession of which he is entitled. An action in detention 20 would lie only for such specific
article of movable property capable of being recovered in specie and of being seized and
delivered up to the winning party.

19 Nair Service Society Ltd. v. K.C. Alexander, A.I.R. 1968 SC 1165.

20 Bansi v. Govardhan, A.I.R. 1976 MP 125.


Constitutional Remedies
The Constitution of India embodies a number of fundamental rights in Part 3. For violation of
these fundamental rights, the constitution guarantees a remedy21 and consequently the right to
move the court itself has become a fundamental right. The Supreme Court and other courts
empowered in this behalf22 shall have the powers to issue directions or orders or writs
including the writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and
certiorari , whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the abovementioned rights.23 The rights guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as
otherwise provided for by the constitution.
21 Art. 32(1)
22 Art. 32(3) and 226
23 Art.32(2)

Extra Judicial Remedies

Extra legal remedies are remedies without the ordinary course of judicial proceedings; or
remedies out of regular course of legal procedure; something which is done without judicial
proceedings. In all cases of wrongs committed or threatened against a person it is not
necessary for him to approach the court in order to seek protection or redress.
Law grants a person liberty to save himself by his own acts and strength. At times it is not
possible to have recourse to courts of law because there is practically no time left for doing
so, the damage inflicted or threatened to be imposed is so immediate and serious in nature
that there is no alternative left to a person on the spot who would be the victim of the
situation if he remains a mere passive perceiver and does not act, or does not take the law in
hand by becoming his own judge. When the law thus allows a person to be his own judge and
to act, he may act to stop the damage. He is to defend his life, liberty or property even by
using force proportionate and necessary to the occasion.

a)Self- help
It is plain common sense that everyone has a right to defend one owns person and property
when attacked by wrongdoer. This right of self- help may be distinguished from the right of
private defence. Self- help is allowed or permitted in order to put an end to the circumstance or
state of affairs in which a person has been placed where has private defence is allowed for the
prevention of a wrong. However, it must be noted that the limitation placed in both the cases so
far as use of force is concerned is the same, and it is, that the force used must not be
(1)Unnecessary or (2)disproportionate to the situation or provocation.
b)Expulsion of trespasser
If a person enters the land of another without the owners consent, against his will, by force
and violence he may be immediately repelled and turned out of the land by the owner by

force without a prior request by him.24 But if the entry is peacefully made, a prior request to
leave is a must before the owner lays his hands on the trespasser.
A person in effective possession of the premises though he may not be a true owner can avail
of this remedy of forcibly expulsion of a trespasser.
c)Re-entry on land
An owner dispossessed from his land or property may re-enter the same if he can do so
without force and peacefully. In view of Section 105 of the Indian Penal Code defence of
private property is available but it does not allow re-entry on land after the trespasser has
completed his act of trespass.
d)Recaption of goods
A person dispossessed of his chattel may invoke his privilege of recapturing it and may not
resort to judicial proceedings. He may for this purpose enter the land of the owner or
occupier for reception of the same if the same is there brought or placed either by design or
by accident. The survival of this mode of self-redress was due to the common laws disability

to compel specific restitution. There is no doubt about this privilege and the use of whatever
force that is reasonably necessary to wrest control from the wrongdoer. There should not be a
considerable time-lag in pursuing this remedy. The owner must act promptly after
e)Distress damage feasant
Distress is a summary remedy by which a person may, without legal process, take possession
of the personal chattels of another and hold them to compel the performance of a duty, the
satisfaction of a debt or demand, or the payment of damages for cattle-trespass. Distress
damage feasant is a common law remedy for the recovery of compensation for trespass by
animals taken while doing the damage.

24 Pratap Daji v. B.B. & C.I. Rly., (1875) 1 Bom 52.


In many respects it resembles the privilege of forcibly resisting trespassory invasion of land;
and still finds some justification in the fact that many minor annoyances such as encroaching
branches and roots are more expediently removed by self help, and that on other occasions
security of life and property requires a speedy remedy without time to call on a culprit or
resort to law.

After going through this project, we get sufficient information about different remedies
available in different situation of any offence created under the domain of torts. Any person
whose right has been violated will be met with sufficient remedy as per situation and gravity
of the offence.
Remedies are available in form of compensation as well as without compensation like
injunction, specific restitution of property etc. In some case compensation to be provided
where as in some cases it is low. In some cases damages or compensation are also reduced if
there is some fault from the plaintiffs side. Plaintiff in some cases can also avail the remedy
without going to the court like abatement of nuisance. Remedies are provided so that the
sufferer does not lose his confidence in law. It is the beauty of law that no offender should be
spared and sufferer will be met with some sort of remedy- if a man gives another a cuff on

the year, though it costs him nothing, yet he shall have his action because it is a personal
injury. In case of tort, remedy which is to be given to plaintiff are not predetermined, in case
where damages are to be awarded, it is left to the discretion of the court.
From this project we can conclude that main aim of tort law is to provide the plaintiff with
sufficient remedy, so that person can be in that situation if he would have not suffer from the
act of defendant.


1. Singh S.P., Law of Tort, New Delhi, Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2010(5th
2. Gandhi B.M., Law of Torts, Lucknow, Eastern Book Company, 2006(3rd ed.).
3. Burrows Andrew, Remedies for Tort and Breach of Contract, Oxford University Press,
4. Pillai P.S.A., Law of Tort, Lucknow, Eastern Book Company, 2010(Reprint).
5. Bangia R.K., Law of Torts, Allahabad Law Agency, 2010.
6. Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, The Law of Torts, Wadhwa and Company Nagpur, 2006(25th ed.).