| Citation | |
| Keywords | |
| Facts | |
| Issues | |
| Contentions | |
| Law Points | |
| Judgment | |
| Ratio Decidendi & Case Authority |
Full Case Details
Facts
- The plaintiff made certain construction without complying with the provisions of the U.P. Municipalities Act. The defendants demolished the construction.
- The plaintiff sued the defendants contending that the demolition was illegal as some of the officers of the Town Area Committee were acting maliciously in getting the construction demolished.
- The Allahabad High Court held that the demolition of a building illegally constructed was perfectly lawful. The Court did not investigate the question whether the act was done maliciously or not as the same was considered to be irrelevant
Principles
- Damnum sine injuria – Damage without injury
- Act of plaintiff must be legal to get Damnum sine injuria
No person has the right to enjoy the fruits of an act which is an offence under law.
- Eminent domain
- Hari swaroop – Judge
The plaintiff can get compensation only if he proves to have suffered injury because of an illegal act of the defendant and not
- otherwise.
- Malice does not enter the scene at all.
- A legal act, though motivated by malice, will not make the action liable to pay damages…………………………………………………. merely because
some officer has malice against a citizen who has committed a wrong will not render the action of the authority invalid if it is otherwise in accordance with law. Mere malice cannot disentitle a person from taking recourse to law for getting the wrong undone. It is, therefore, not necessary to investigate whether the action was motivated by malice or not.
