Is Injuria sine damnum an 'actionable' wrong?

0 votes
Lily Chitlangiya asked 29-Nov-2021 in Law & Legal Issues by Lily Chitlangiya

Is Injuria sine damnum an 'actionable' wrong?

1 Answer

1 votes
Lily Chitlangiya answered 29-Nov-2021 by Lily Chitlangiya
Injuria Sine Damnum is actionable during the violation of any legal Right

Injuria Sine Damnum is a violation of legal rights. Without causing any harm, loss, and damage to the plaintiff and any person who faces such damage or loss due to the accused actions can take actions against that accused. In the short term, we can say that an Injuria Sine Damnum is a violation of the rights given by the Law of the Country, whether the physical injury is being done or not. It is even applicable in the trespass and the detention and the plaintiff can claim his right by filing a suit in the court on the basis of the Specific Relief Act.

Is Injuria sine damnum an

Points related to Injuria Sine Damnum

  • Injuria sine Damnum is the legal injury available to the plaintiff whenever his legal Rights get infringed, without facing any physical damages.
  • This is the only injury available in the Law which compensates the damages without suffering any physical harm.
  • In order to provide the injury, the Court provides compensation in the form of damages.
Case Laws

  • Bhim Singh vs. State of Jammu Kashmir
  • In this case, Mr. Bhim Singh, an MLA of Jammu & Kashmir was detained by the police officer, standing outside the main gate of the Legislative Assembly. The MLA was trying to go to the Legislative assembly for voting purposes. The Court took tough action against the state and order compensation of 50,000. Here we can clearly observe that without having any physical damage the court compensated the member of the Legislative Assembly just because of the provision Injuria Sine Damnum in the Specific Relief Act.
  • Ashby vs. White (1703)
  • In this case, Plaintiff was prohibited to cast his vote being a valid voter in the ongoing elections that time, the election officials refused to take his vote. But the plaintiff suffered no damage and in fact, his desiring member won the election as he wanted to vote for but on the contrary position, the Court held the defendant liable and order compensation to the plaintiff. The reason behind the order was the remedy available in the case when even no loss was faced by the plaintiff but if his legal right will have been violated, he will get the remedy of Injuria Sine Damnum.