November 7, 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

Dharangadhara Chemical Works Ltd. v. State of SaurashtraAIR 1957 SC 264 : 1957 SCR 152

vikash Kumar

Shamim Ara v State of U.P 2002 Case Analysis

Rohini Thomare

The Analytical School Imperative Positive Teleological English Austinian John Austin

Neeraj Kumar

Leave a Comment