Nuisance as a Tort

The French term "Nuire," which means to injure, annoy, cause inconvenience, or cause damage, is where the word "nuisance" originates. Legally, a person who owns the property has the right to use it without interference. We may claim that a tort of annoyance has occurred if another person's inappropriate use of his property causes an unlawful interference with his use or enjoyment of that property, or of any right over, or in connection with it.

CLAT 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Maxims | Landmark Judgements | PYQs

CUET BA LLB 2025:  Legal Studies ebook | 5 Free Mock Tests

MH CET LAW 2025: 10 Free Mock Tests | Legal Reasoning Practice Questions

Monthly Legal Current Affairs:  August’24 | July’24 | June’24

This Story also Contains

1. Essential Elements of Nuisance
2. Types of Nuisance
3. Defences Available For Nuisance
4. Remedies for Nuisance
5. Landmark Case Laws on Nuisance in Tort
6. Conclusion

Stated otherwise, a nuisance is when someone else's use or enjoyment of land, a right over it, or anything related to it is unlawfully interfered with. A nuisance is when someone else uses someone else's property improperly, impairing the owner's right to enjoy their property uninterrupted.

Essential Elements of Nuisance

Commission of a Wrongful Act

An act must be unlawful interference with a person's property or be prima facie wrongful to qualify as a nuisance. Only when someone interferes with the plaintiff's ability to enjoy their property peacefully, whether through illegal means or without a legitimate justification, can an act of nuisance be proven.

Damage Caused to Another Individual

For the law to recognize the irritation, loss, or harm as substantial evidence in support of the claim, it must be substantial. In this situation, the plaintiff may suffer physical harm or their property may be destroyed. Any legitimate harm that is, property damage would be enough to trigger legal action.

Types of Nuisance

Public Nuisance

A public nuisance is defined as an activity that impacts the public at large or a significant portion of it and impedes a member of the public's right that they might otherwise be able to enjoy. Public nuisances have historically been defined as acts that substantially impair the public's health, safety, comfort, or convenience or that undermine public morality. A public nuisance as defined by the Indian Penal Code is meant by the wording under Section 3 (48) of the General Clauses Act, 1897.

Public nuisances have an impact on society as a whole, on a sizable segment of the population, and on the property rights that society's members may be able to exercise. A public nuisance is an act that has a major negative impact on or interferes with the general public's comfort, safety, or health. Here are the circumstances under which a person may enjoy private rights in a public Nuisance-

• He has to demonstrate the presence of any personal injuries that exceed the average degree suffered by the general public.

• Such damage cannot be merely incidental; it must be direct.

• The injury needs to demonstrate its significant impact.

In the case of, Ram Raj Singh v. Babulal

In this case, It was decided that the defendants' installation of a brick-grinding machine next to the plaintiff's land a medical practitioner caused a public nuisance because the machine's dust affected all of the patients and guests.

Private Nuisance

When someone else violates someone else's right to use or enjoy their property, it is considered a private nuisance. Additionally, it might physically harm the property owner's possessions or make them less enjoyable, which would be bad for them. Private nuisances limit a person's use or enjoyment of their property, as opposed to public nuisances, which have an impact on the community or the wider public. A civil court may receive a private nuisance complaint seeking damages, injunction, or both.

Elements of Private Nuisance

Unlawful or Unreasonable Interference

An act of irritation can only be demonstrated when someone infringes on the plaintiffs' right to quiet enjoyment of their property in an illegal or unjustified manner. Consequently, if an individual in a position of authority commits a nuisance offence while carrying out their designated responsibilities, they will not be held responsible.

Such Interference Should have a Connection With the land

Everybody has the right to enjoy their land in quiet. This legislation is simply in existence to safeguard their rights. In the case of, Datta Mal Chiranji Lal v. Lodh Prasad It was decided that the plaintiff had a right to pursue legal action in the case where the defendants' electric mill created excessive noise, making it impossible for the plaintiff to enjoy his home calmly.

Damages Suffered By the Plaintiff

Either the plaintiff's property or their bodily suffering may be damaged in this case. If the property is damaged, any reasonable harm would be sufficient to warrant legal action.

In the case of, Dilware v. Westminster City Council The neighbor's building developed a crack due to the respondent's tree's roots. In this instance, the neighbour was able to pursue damages for the harm done to his property.

In the case of, Rose v. Miles

In the case, Due to the defendant's unlawful obstruction of a publicly accessible navigable waterway, he was unable to carry his products through the creek and had to do so on land, incurring additional transportation costs. The plaintiff successfully demonstrated that he had suffered a loss over other members of society and that he was entitled to pursue legal action against the defendant, leading to the conclusion that the defendant's actions had created a public nuisance.

Defences Available For Nuisance

Prescription

A person can legally claim any property because their ancestors were legally entitled to own it; this is known as a prescription, which is a title gained through use and time. Prescription is a unique type of defence in which the party may use it if the nuisance has existed openly and peacefully for some time without any interruption. After these twenty years have passed, the nuisance is legalized in the same way as if it had been granted permission by the landowner at the beginning.

Essentials to Establish the Defence of Prescription

Enjoyment of Property

The individual must legally get the property to use or enjoy it, and such usage or enjoyment must take place in an open and tranquil manner.

Identification of the Property

The person enjoying something in quiet or in public should know what it is that they are enjoying.

Such Rights Should be adverse to the rights of other Persons

The thing or property must be used or enjoyed in a way that interferes with another person's rights and constitutes a nuisance. Even when it is obvious that they are, the person producing the disruption must have escaped punishment for at least twenty years.

Statutory Authority

As long as all reasonable measures consistent with the exercise of the statutory authorities have also been taken, all remedies, including indictments and actions, are forbidden when legislation enables the commission of specified activity or the use of land in a specific manner.

The statute allows an action with total authority even when it must unavoidably cause a nuisance or other kind of harm. Regarding conditional authority, the State will only allow an activity to be carried out if it can be done so without causing a nuisance or any other type of harm. This means that due diligence, caution, and respect for private rights must be used.

In the case of, Vaughan v. Taff Vale Rly

In this case, The defendants, who were granted permission by statute to operate locomotive engines on their railway, were found not accountable for a fire that resulted from sparks escaping.

Act of God or Vis Major

Defendants may raise the defence of an "act of God," arguing that the cause of the incident is a superior natural force that is beyond human comprehension or power. In the case of, Nicholas v. Marsland It was decided that the plaintiff could not be held responsible for the flood brought on by such lakes in cases where an abnormally high level of rainfall caused the lake's embankments to breach. As such, it was an unforeseen and uncontrollable act of god.

Plaintiff’s Consent

This essentially amounts to a "Volenti non-fit injuria" defence in cases when the plaintiff has given their express or tacit approval for the nuisance behaviour in question. At the time of the plaintiff's tenancy, the defendant in Kiddle v. City Business Properties was renting out a ground-floor apartment. Even during the plaintiff's rental of the property, the landlord's gutter remained obstructed. Because he gave his assent, the defendant was thus able to assert this defence in this case where the plaintiff's stock was lost.

Remedies for Nuisance

Injunction

An injunction is a type of court order that forbids someone from taking any action that would jeopardize or infringe upon the legal rights of another. It might take the form of a temporary injunction that is granted, revoked, or upheld over a brief time. If it is upheld, the injunction becomes permanent.

Damages

Damages act as compensation decided by the court on the amount of injury or harm faced by the plaintiff. The damages should be equal to the injury or harm faced by the aggrieved party in a breach of such rights. The wrongdoer is bound to pay the damages to the aggrieved party for the injury caused.

Abatement

A nuisance is abated when it is removed by the aggrieved party without the need for legal action. The law does not favour this type of remedy. but is accessible in specific situations. The defendant must typically be notified of this right and his failure to act, and it must be used within a reasonable amount of time. Reasonable steps may be employed to utilize the abatement, and if the plaintiff's actions exceed reasonable measures, he will be held accountable.

Landmark Case Laws on Nuisance in Tort

In the case of, Shaikh Ismail Habib v. Nirchanda

In this case, The defendant had set aside a portion of his own home for charitable purposes, where he permitted anyone in the neighbourhood to perform any kind of function related to marriage ceremonies, poojas, etc. at no additional expense to them. Discordant instruments were performed for extended periods throughout ceremonies, and there was a lot of noise created because of this particular charity site. It was difficult for the residents in this typical residential area to go out of their everyday activities as usual.

The top court determined that the defendant's actions constituted a nuisance, hence the plaintiff was entitled to an injunction prohibiting the defendant from waking her up during her slumber. In some situations, charitable giving cannot be used as a defence.

In the case of, Christi v. Davey

In this case, The defendant filed the complaint claiming that the plaintiff's singing lessons and music were a constant source of irritation for him. The plaintiff in this case was a music instructor who taught pupils four days a week for a total of about seventeen hours. The plaintiff was upsetting the neighbours, so they threw a party where they beat trays, whistled, and screamed, interfering with his music instruction.

It was decided that providing music instruction could not be justified as an unreasonable use of the home, subject to an injunction. But a big part of the irritation was from the person's evil intent, which was made clear by their partying and wired-sounding meddling with this lesson.

Conclusion

In a nuisance, an act of a person affects the individual or society as a whole. According to the Law of Torts, there are two types of nuisance Private nuisance under which an individual’s rights are infringed and the second is a public nuisance in which the rights of a whole society are infringed by an act committed by a person. The concept of nuisance in the Indian judicial system evolved with multiple judicial interpretations and judicial prounucments.