November 22, 2024
DU LLBLaw of TortsSemester 1

MC MEHTA & Anr V UNION OF INDIA and Ors CJ ( PN BHAGWATI )

Citation
Keywords
Facts
Issues
Contentions
Law Points
Judgment
Ratio Decidendi & Case Authority

Full Case Details

Facts

  • The petitioners, in this writ petition under Article 32, sough a direction for closure of the various units of Shriram Foods & Fertilizers Industries  on the ground that they were hazardous to the community.
  • During the pendency of the petition, there was escape of oleum gas from one of the units of Shriram.
  • The Delhi Legal Aid and Advice Board and the Delhi Bar Association filed applications for award of compensation to the persons who had suffered harm on account of escape of oleum gas.

Principles

  • “We are of the view that an enterprise which is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous industry.
  • Which poses a potential threat to the health and safety of the persons working in the factory and residing in the surrounding areas owes an absolute and non−delegable duty to the community to ensure that no harm results to anyone on account of hazardous or inherently dangerous activity which it has undertaken.
  • The enterprise must be held to be under an obligation to provide that the hazardous or inherently dangerous activity in which it is engaged must be conducted with the highest standards of safety and if any harm results on account of such activity, the enterprise must be absolutely liable to compensate for such harm and it should be no answer to the enterprise to say that it had taken al l reasonable care and that the harm occurred without any negligence on its part.”
  • Activity for private profit.

Related posts

Delhi Cloth & General Mills Ltd. v. Kushal Bhan(1960) 3 SCR 227 : AIR 1960 SC 806

vikash Kumar

State of Madras v. C.P. Sarathy1953 SCR 334 : AIR 1953 SC 53

vikash Kumar

JADHAV CASE(INDIA v. PAKISTAN)ICJ Rep. 2019(Consular Immunity)

vikash Kumar

Leave a Comment