THE NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE

UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

TRIMESTER-I

LAW OF TORTS
PROJECT
on
INJURIA SINE DAMNO – THE REAL TEST FOR
DETERMINING DEFENDANT’S LIABILITY IN
TORTS

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

KAVITA SINGH CHANCHAL DHAKAD

Associate professor 2017 B.A.L.L.B. 67

 Page 2 of 26

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I take this opportunity to thanks everyone who helped out in completing my project directly
or indirectly. I show a special gratitude to , Assoc. prof . Kavita Singh who was abundantly
helpful and offered invaluable assistance, support and guidance firstly in selecting the topic
of project then with the research work, without whose knowledge and assistance this project
would not have been successful. . I would also like to thanks NLIU’s library, which helped a
lot in learning more about my project’s topic
 Page 3 of 26

OBJECTIVES

This project work aims to study what the MAXIM Injuria sine damno means and how it is a
real test for determining liability of a defender in LAW OF LORTS . Also there is a detailed
study of some cases decided in reference to the aforementioned principle. In light of these
judgments we shall come across the following subtopics.

 Meaning of injuria sine damno

 Difference between injuria sine damno and damnum sine injuria
 Applicable in torts which are actionable per se
 It’s importance in law of torts
 Application and citation in various cases

REVIEW OF LITERATURE
 Page 4 of 26

1. LAW OF TORTS , BY DR. R.K. BANGIA

The dynamic interpretation of the concepts of torts is well explained with related case
laws. And the growth of the tort law has not affected the application of the basic
principles. These principles are discussed with proper interpretation at proper places
in this book.

2. LAW OF TORTS .BY JOHN COOK

John Cook's Law of Tort is a trusted, clear and engaging explanation of the main
principles of tort law, written specifically with the student in mind. It also includes a
statute section at the end of the text and summaries of the main cases throughout
meaning that students have everything they need to gain a good understanding of the
law at their fingertips

3. LAW OF TORTS. BY RAMASWAMY IYER

This book was originally published in the year 1975 and is a concerted effort in
streamlining the various concepts in the field of law of torts in modern India. It is a
comprehensive and detailed commentary, critically analysing the nuances of this
intriguing branch of law, which is not codified in India, and is largely dependent on
precedents and case laws.
 Page 5 of 26

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents
OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................................3

INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………..6

NARRROW RULE IN DONOGHUE V. STEVENSON..........................................................9

LANDMARK CASES.............................................................................................................11

 Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932] All ER Rep 1...........................................................11

 JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS.............................................................................11

 Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v. Heller & Partners Ltd [1963] 2 All ER 575...................11

 JUDGEMNT AND ANALYSIS...............................................................................12

 Home Office v. Dorset Yacht Co. Ltd. [1970] 2 All ER 294....................................12

 JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS.............................................................................13

 Caparo Industries plc v Dickman..............................................................................13

 JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS.............................................................................14

RECENT CASE.......................................................................................................................15

 Rajkot Municipal Corporation v. Manjulb Jayantilal Nakum and Others (1997) 9

SCC 552...........................................................................................................................15

 JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS.............................................................................15

CONCLUSION........................................................................................................................17

BIBLIOGRAPHY....................................................................................................................18
 Page 6 of 26

INTRODUCTION

 Injuria sine damno-

Let's see meaning of maxim 'injuria sine damno' 

     1)  Injuria - injury to legal right

     2)  sine -without 

     3) damno - damages, monetary loss.

 INJURY TO LEGAL RIGHT

 any harm done to a person by the acts or omissions of another. Injury may include physical
hurt as well as damage to reputation or dignity, loss of a legal right or breach of contract. If
the party causing the injury was either wilful (intentionally causing harm) or negligent then
he/she is responsible (liable) for payment of damages for the harm caused. Theoretically,
potential or continuing injury may be prevented by an order of the court upon a petition for
an injunction
 Page 7 of 26

 Damages

n. the amount of money which a plaintiff (the person suing) may be awarded in a lawsuit. The
re are many types of damages.Special damages are those which actually were caused by the i
njury and include medical and hospital bills, ambulancecharges, loss of wages, property repai
r or replacement costs, or loss of money due on a contract. The second basic area ofdamages i
s general damages which are presumed to be a result of the other party's actions, but are subje
ctive both in natureand determination of value of damages. These include pain and suffering, 
future problems and crippling effect of an injury,loss of ability to perform various acts, shorte
ning of life span, mental anguish, loss of companionship, loss of reputation (in alibel suit, for 
example), humiliation from scars, loss of anticipated business and other harm. The third majo
r form of damageis exemplary (or punitive) damages, which combines punishment and the se
tting of public example. Punitive damages maybe awarded when the defendant acted in a mal
icious, violent, oppressive, fraudulent, wanton, or grossly reckless way incausing the special 
and general damages to the plaintiff. On occasion punitive damages can be greater than the ac
tualdamages, as, for example, in a sexual harassment case or fraudulent schemes. Although of
ten asked for, they are seldomawarded. Nominal damages are those given when the actual har
m is minor and an award is warranted under thecircumstances. The most famous case was wh
en Winston Churchill was awarded a shilling (about 25 cents) against authorLouis Adamic w
ho had written that the British Prime Minister had been drunk at a dinner at the White House. 
Liquidateddamages are those pre-set by the parties in a contract to be awarded in case one par
ty defaults as in breach of contract.

 Meaning - 
   
 Page 8 of 26

The meaning of this maxim is injury to legal right without any monetary loss.  This is
actionable,  because there is violation of legal right, even though plaintiff suffer no
loss in term of money and defendant is liable.

      In simple words,  Injuria sine damno means Injury without damage or it means

infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage. 
whenever there is an invasion of legal right, the person in whom the right is vested is
entitled to bring an action and may recover damages, although he has suffered no
actual harm. In such case, the person need not prove the actual damage caused to him.
Example Trespass to land or property.

     Suppose 'A' enter a private compound without permission of the owner just for
asking water, here the moment 'A' step in, A commit trespass and action can lie
against 'A' even no actual damage is caused.

 DEFINATION FROM LAW DICTIONARY

 Page 9 of 26

  It means injury without damages, e.g. opening up a competitive store will cause injury to the
first store’s business but no legal damages as a result of the competition for customers

 In cases of injuria sine damno, i.e., the infringement of an absolute private right without any
actual loss or damage, the person whose right is infringed has a cause of action. Every person
has an absolute right to his property, to the immunity of his person, and to his liberty, and an
infringement of this right is actionable per se. In India, the same principles have been
followed. The Privy Council has observed that “there may be, where a right is interfered with,
injuria sine damno sufficient to found an action: but no action can be maintained where there
is neither damnum nor injuria.

Injuria sine damno means violation of a legal right without causing any harm, loss or damage
to the plaintiff. It is just reverse to the maxim damnum sine injuria. No loss was suffered by
such refusal because the candidate for whom he wanted to vote won in spite of that. The
defendant was held liable, even though his act did not cause any damage.

In case of injuria sine damno the loss suffered by the plaintiff is not relevant for the purpose
of a cause of action. It is relevant only for assessing the amount of damages. If the plaintiff
has suffered no harm and yet the wrongful act is actionable, nominal damages may be
awarded.

Thus, the maxim injuria sine damno can be better explained by the mathematical formula
deduced by Professor S.P. Singh in his book ‘Law of Tort’ as:

Act + Injury-Loss = Injuria sine damno.

Defendant’s act + Plaintiff’s Injury — Plaintiff’s loss = Injuria sine damno.

 Page 10 of 26

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN INJURIA SINE DAMNO AND

DAMNUM SINE INJURIA

Injuria Sine Damno is used in law of torts and is related to damages. The meaning of the
above maxim is infringement of an absolute private right without any actual loss or damage.
Here the actual damage means physical loss in terms of money, comfort, health, etc. This
maxim says that in the law of torts the infringement of right is itself considered as damage
and there is no need to prove that an actual damage is caused. To make it clear “whenever a
person has sustained what the law calls as ‘injury’ he may bring an action without being
under the necessity of proving special damage, because the injury itself is taken to imply
damage”. We can take many examples regarding this maxim. If a person comes to your home
without your permission and roams all around in your home and leaves your home, here there
is no actual damage caused but your private legal right has been infringed.
Damnum sine injuria refers to a legal situation in which plaintiff’s right is not respected by
another but where the breach of plaintiff’s right does not cause damage, or at least not a
calculable or admissible damage. A finding of damnum sine injuria can be the basis for a
finding of nominal damages. Thus in cases of damnum sine injuria the injury is de minims,
i.e. too small to be remedied practically at the law. In such cases the plaintiff will have a
satisfaction remedy of nominal damages - which are also called symbolic damages.
 Page 11 of 26

LEGAL INJURY IS MUST

Legal injury rule is a principle that a cause of action generally accrues when a wrongful act
causes some legal injury. Therefore the statute of limitations on a claim does not begin to run
until the claimant has sustained some legally actionable damage. For example, under the
legal-injury rule, contract claims generally accrue when the contract is breached. A breach
occurs when a party fails to perform a duty required by the contract.

The two exceptions to the legal injury rule are: the discovery rule, and fraudulent
concealment. Under the discovery rule, an action does not accrue until the plaintiff knew or
in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have known of the wrongful act and resulting
injury. The rule postpones the running of the statutory limitation period until such time as the
claimant discovers, or in exercising reasonable diligence should have discovered, facts that
indicate he has been injured. Under the fraudulent concealment exception to the legal injury
rule, accrual is deferred because a person cannot be permitted to avoid liability for his actions
by deceitfully concealing wrongdoing until limitations has run. In such cases, the limitations
period is tolled until such time as the plaintiff learned of, or should have discovered, the
deceitful conduct or the facts giving rise to the cause of action.

The doctrine was initially articulated by the Texas Supreme Court in Houston Water-Works
v. Kennedy, 70 Tex. 233, 8 S.W. 36 (1888).Under the Texas legal injury rule, "a cause of
action accrues when a wrongful act causes some legal injury, even if the fact of injury is not
discovered until later, and even if all resulting damages have not yet occurred “Legal injury"
is defined as "an injury giving cause of action by reason of its being an invasion of a
plaintiff's right.[Best v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27886 (S.D. Tex. Mar.
23, 2010)]

Legal injury rule is also known as damage rule.

 Page 12 of 26

Principles which form the foundation of the law of torts are

usually expressed by saying the injuria sine damno is actionable
but damnum sine (or absque) injuria is not.

One of the outstanding fact of English legal history for the last three centuries is the
development of the law of torts from small beginnings to its present dimensions as a separate
branch of law. The action for damages as a remedy for violations of rights and duties has
been fashioned by lawyers, judges and juries of England as an instrument for making people
adhere to standards of reasonable behaviour and respect the rights and interest of one another.
A body of Rules has grown and is constantly growing in response to new concepts of right
and duty and new needs and conditions of advancing civilization. The principles which form
the foundation of the law of torts are usually expressed by saying the injuria sine damno is
actionable but damnum sine (or absque) injuria is not.

Subramanian Swamy vs. Union of India (UOI), Ministry of Law and Ors. (13.05.2016 - SC) : MANU/SC/0621/2016 1i

1
 Page 13 of 26

LANDMARK CASES

 Ashby v White(1703) 92 ER 126

Facts

Mr Ashby was prevented from voting at an election by the misfeasance of a constable, Mr

White, on the apparent pretext that he was not a settled inhabitant.

At the time, the case attracted considerable national interest, and debates in Parliament. It was
later known as the Aylesbury election case. In the House of Lords, it attracted the interest
of Peter King, 1st Baron King who spoke and maintained the right of electors to have
a remedy at common law for denial of their votes, against Tory insistence on the privileges of
the House of Commons.

Sir Thomas Powys defended William White in the House of Lords. The argument submitted
was that the Commons alone had the power to determine election cases, not the courts.

 JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS

 Page 14 of 26

 In the leading case of Ashby v. White, which is illustrative of violation of an absolute right,
the Court held that “Every injury imports a damage; though it does not cost the party one
farthing, and it is impossible to prove the contrary; for a damage is not merely pecuniary, but
an injury imports a damage, when a man is thereby hindered of his right. As in an action for
slanderous words, though a man does not lose a penny because of the speaking them, yet he
shall have an action. So if a man gives another a cuff on the ear, though it costs him nothing,
not so much as a little diachylon (plaster), yet he shall have his action, for it is personal
injury. So a man shall have an action against another for riding over his ground, though it
does him no damage; for it is an invasion of his property and the other has no right to come
there”.

The right of voting at the election of burgesses is a thing of the highest importance, and so
great a privilege, that it is a great injury to deprive the plaintiff of it. These reasons have
satisfied me as to the first point.

If the plaintiff has a right, he must of necessity have a means to vindicate and maintain it, and
a remedy if he is injured in the exercise or enjoyment of it, and, indeed it is a vain thing to
imagine a right without a remedy; for want of right and want of remedy are reciprocal.

And I am of opinion, that this action on the case is a proper action. My brother Powell indeed
thinks, that an action upon the case is not maintainable, because here is no hurt or damage to
the plaintiff; but surely every injury imports a damage, though it does not cost the party one
farthing, and it is impossible to prove the contrary; for a damage is not merely pecuniary, but
an injury imports a damage, when a man is thereby hindered of his right. As in an action for
slanderous words, though a man does not lose a penny by reason of the speaking them, yet he
shall have an action. So if a man gives another a cuff on the ear, though it cost him nothing,
no not so much as a little diachylon, yet he shall have his action, for it is a personal injury. So
a man shall have an action against another for riding over his ground, though it do him no
 Page 15 of 26

damage; for it is an invasion of his property, and the other has no right to come there. And in
these cases the action is brought vi et armis. But for invasion of another's franchise, trespass
vi et armis does not lie, but an action of trespass on the case; as where a man has return
brevier, he shall have an action against anyone who enters and invades his franchise, though
he lose nothing by it. So here in the principal case, the plaintiff is obstructed of his right, and
shall therefore have his action. And it is no objection to say, that it will occasion multiplicity
of actions; for if men will multiply injuries, actions must be multiplied too; for every man
that is injured ought to have his recompense...

 But from hence it appears that every man, that is to give his vote on the election of members
to serve in Parliament, has a several and particular right in his private capacity, as a citizen
or burgess. And surely it cannot be said, that this is so inconsiderable a right, as to apply that
maxim to it, de minims non curate Lex

Ashby v. White, the eighteenth century voting rights case, is said to have established the
principle that for every right, there must be a remedy. That principle, often rendered in
portentous Latin--ubi jus, ibi remedium--has played an important role in Anglo-American
legal rhetoric. Commentators since Blackstone have argued that the ubi jus principle is
fundamental to the rule of law. Marbury v. Madison applied the ubi jus principle when laying
the foundation of judicial review, and courts since have similarly relied on it in a variety of
contexts. Some have even argued that the Due Process Clause mandates adherence to ubi
jus. As the supposed progenitor, Ashby v. White has been hailed as a centrally important case
in the development of the Anglo-American conception of remedial justice.

Every injury imports a damage, though it does not cost a party one farthing (or paisa) (the
damage is not merely pecuniary), the damage being that the person is thereby hindered of his
right. As in an action for slanderous words, though a man does not lose a penny by reason of
the speaking of them yet he shall have an action against another for riding over his ground,
though it does him no damage, for it is an invasion of his property, and the other has no right
to come there.

 If a legal right is infringed an action will lie, even though no damage is caused. The plaintiff,
being duly qualified, had tendered his vote in an election of burgesses for Parliament, and this
 Page 16 of 26

had been refused by the defendants as returning officers. Although the candidates for whom
he would have voted were duly elected, the plaintiff brought an action and obtained a verdict.

 Bhim Singh , MLA vs State of J&K & Ors.

AIR 1986 SC 494

 FACTS
 Page 17 of 26

Criminal - Appellant who was a member of Legislative Assembly was prevented from
attending the session of Legislative Assembly. He was suspended from Legislative Assembly
on ground of giving delivering an inflammatory speech at a public meeting. He was
remanded by the Order of Magistrate for two days and by the order of Sub-Judge for on day -
Order of suspension stayed by High Court .Hence, present appeal. Facts revealed that when
appellant was o his way to attend the Legislative Assembly he was prevented from
proceeding to State capital by police officers by arresting him .Police officers were custodian
of law and Order and were highly unjustified in violating the personal liberty of member of
legislative assembly. Their duty is to protect and not to abduct. When a person complains that
he has been arrested and imprisoned with mischievous or malicious intent and that his
constitutional and legal rights were invaded the mischief or malice and the invasion may not
be washed away or wished away by his being set free but by awarding him suitable monetary
compensation. Held, State directed to award compensation to the appellant.

On August 17, 1985 Bhim Singh was suspended from the opening of the budget session of
the Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly that was scheduled for September 11. He
subsequently challenged the suspension in the Jammu and Kashmir High Court. After his
suspension was stayed by High Court on September 9, Bhim Singh left Jammu for Srinagar
to attend the Legislative Assembly session. On route at 3:00 am on September 10, he was
intercepted by the police at Qazi Kund, 70 km from Srinagar. He was taken away by the
police and kept prisoner at an undisclosed location. After attempts to locate him proved futile
his wife and advocate Jayamala then moved the court to locate Bhim Singh. On September
13, the court ordered the inspector general of the police to inform Jayamala where her
husband was being held in custody. Only after this was Bhim Singh brought before a
magistrate for the first time on September 14. In the case the court found statements by M.A.
Mir, superintendent of police to be false, neither could the superintendent explain why he
expected Bhim Singh to travel through Qazi Kund on the night of his arrest. The court also
found the lengthy affidavit filed by inspector general Khajuria contained statements of facts
that he could not possibly have been aware off. The court found that Bhim Singh was not
produced before the magistrate nor sub judge who issued the police orders of remand and that
the police obtained the orders in surreptitious circumstances at the residence of the magistrate
and after hours from the sub judge. The Supreme Court judge, O. Chinnappa Reddy criticized
the conduct of the magistrate and sub judge stating that they had no concern for the subject
out of either casual behaviour or worse that they had potentially colluded with the police who
 Page 18 of 26

had deliberately acted mala fide. The court ruled that there "certainly was a gross violation of
Shri Bhim Singh's constitutional rights" and condemned the "authoritarian acts of the police."
The judges though stated that the police were but minions and that they were in no doubt that
the top levels of the Government of Jammu and Kashmir where ultimately responsible.

The Supreme Court in a landmark judgement that impacted tort law in India, awarded Bhim
Singh a compensation of fifty thousand rupees for his illegal detention and false
imprisonment by the police.

 JUGDEMENT AND ANALYSIS

Compensation to victims is a recognised principle of law being enforced through the ordinary
civil courts. Under the law of torts the victims can claim compensation for the injury to the
person or property suffered by them. It is now taking decades for the victims to get a decree
for damages or compensation through civil courts, which is resulting in so much hardship to
them. The emergence of compensatory jurisprudence in the light of human rights philosophy
is a positive signal indicating that the judiciary has undertaken the task of protecting the right
to life and personal liberty of all the people irrespective of the absence of any express
constitutional provision and of judicial precedents.
 Page 19 of 26

 ASHRAFILAL V. MUNCIPAL BOARD OF AGRA

(1922) ILR 44 All 202

FACTS
The plaintiff, who is a pleader, is a previous member of the Board, on which he says he sat
from 1914 to 1916. Two lists are prepared by the officials of the Board under statutory
authority, namely, an electoral roll and a candidates ’ list, An election was approaching in the
year 1919, and the plaintiff had been a severe critic of the Municipal administration up to that
time. He alleges, and on this matter he is the best judge, that his criticism was such as to
create hostility to himself personally among the members of the Board. He is a house owner
and an occupier at Agra and it is not denied that he is entitled to be on both the roll and the
candidates’ list; indeed he was on both, and the revising authority, consisting of three
members of the Board, passed the roll and-the list on the 31st day of Jamiary, 1919. Either as
the result -of what these persons did officially in the course of their business, or wrongly with
intention in the course of their business, or as ■ a result of the revengeful and malicious
interference of some individual, either a member of the Board or an employ6 in the office of
the Board, after the statutory sitting of the revising authority the plaintiff’s name on the list
was so put and his description so fabricated as to represent him to be somebody other than the
person he was known to be.

 JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS

. We would merely say this by way of preface that, in our opinion, the law is India upon the
questions raised is the same as the law in England, and the Common Law of England
provides that if any duly qualified citizen, or burgher, or person entitled to be upon the
 Page 20 of 26

electoral roll of any constituency is omitted from such roll so as to be deprived of his right to
vote, and so as to give the returning officer an adequate ground for refusing him the right to
vote on election day when the matter has to be decided summarily and that refusal or
omission from the roil, as the oases may be, turns out on investigation to be wrongful, he has
suffered a legal wrong ; he has been deprived of a right recognized by law and he has against
the person so depriving him a remedy by what has always been called an action on the case
** for nominal damages for the right that he has lost, which may at the discretion of the court
be punitive or exemplary if the conduct is the result of some malicious and wicked
intention ; and also for any pecuniary expenses to which h© may have been reasonably put as
a result of the wrong done, for example, efforts to replace his name on the roll. It has been
suggested by the Municipal Board before us that the plaintiff either did not seriously assert,
or abandoned, this precise form of claim when he came to court.

• Morningstar Vs. Fafayette Hotel Company  105 N.E.

656 (NY  1914)

FACTS
 The plaintiff , who was a guest at the defendant’s hotel , was fed up with the food served at
the hotel , and so , he purchased some spare ribs outside the hotel , and gave them to the hotel
chef to be cooked and brought to his room . This was done . But the spare ribs were
accompanied by a bill for one dollar which the plaintiff refused to pay . On the following
morning , the plaintiff was publicly informed at the table of breakfast that he would not be
served . The plaintiff sued for wrongful refusal to serve breakfast to him and the Court held
that his legal right had been infringed .

 JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS

 Page 21 of 26

But the law, which creates a right, can certainly not concede that an insistence upon its
enforcement is evidence of a wrong. A great jurist, Rudolf von Inhering, in his "Struggle for
Law," ascribes the development of law itself to the persistence in human nature of the
impulse to resent aggression, and maintains the thesis that the individual owes the duty to
himself and to society never to permit a legal right to be wantonly infringe To enforce one's
rights when they are violated is never a legal wrong, and may often be a moral duty. It
happens in many instances that the violation passes with no effort to redress it — sometimes
from praiseworthy forbearance, sometimes from weakness, sometimes from mere inertia.

 Marzetti v. Marzetti[1830] IB &Ad.415

FACTS
A Banker having sufficient funds in his hands belonging to a customer refused to honour his
cheque.

  After his payments of child and spousal support fell into arrears, M was ordered to pay a
monthly sum to the Director of Maintenance Enforcement.  He later filed a voluntary
assignment in bankruptcy and executed an agreement letter authorizing that any refund resulting
from a post-bankruptcy income tax return be mailed to the appellant trustee as an asset for
distribution to the creditors.  The Director filed a notice of continuing attachment against the
federal Crown.  After M was discharged from bankruptcy, a garnishee summons was issued
putting the notice of continuing attachment into effect.  The trustee filed a post-bankruptcy
income tax return, and a refund became payable.  In response to a motion by the trustee, the
Master declared that the refund constituted property of the bankrupt which vested in the trustee.
 Page 22 of 26

 JUDGEMENT AND ANALYSIS

.The customer sustained no actual loss or damage . The Court held that the customer’s legal
right was infringed and was entitled to damages .

 Moreover, the fact that the court is to have "regard to the family responsibilities and
personal situation of the bankrupt" demonstrates an overriding concern for the support of
families.

 So while Marzetti had "property" in respect of the refund, there was no "property of a bankrupt
divisible among his creditors".

language of Lord Tenterden, C.J., in Marzetti v. Williams,25 which was quoted with approval
in the Rolin case: "I cannot forbear to observe, that it is a discredit to a person, and therefore
injurious in fact, to have a draft refused payment for so small a sum, for it shews that the
banker had very little confidence in the customer." The use of the independent tort measure
of damages is also desirable because it harmonizes with the theory that the banks are under a
public duty to honor checks drawn against sufficient accounts. A bank is an institution of a
quasi-public character. It is chartered by the government for the purpose, inter alia, of holding
and safely keeping the moneys of individuals and corporations.... Individual and corporate
business could hardly exist for a day without banking facilities. At the same time, the
business of the community would be at the mercy of banks if they could at their pleasure
refuse to honor their depositors' checks, and then claim that such action was the mere breach
of an ordinary contract for which only nominal damages could be recovered, unless special
damages were proved. There is something more than a breach of contract in such cases.
 Page 23 of 26

CONCLUSION

For all the courts efforts to elucidate and refine the maxim injuria sine damno , it remains a
general and indeterminate principle. In case of injuria sine damno, the loss suffered by the
plaintiff is not relevant for the purpose of a cause of action . It may be relevant only as
regards the measure of damages.

This principle was capable of assisting courts in determining the scope of defendant’s
liability. If the plaintiff has a right , he must of necessity have a means to vindicate and
maintain it and a remedy , if he is injured in the exercise of enjoyment of it and indeed it is
vain thing to imagine a right without a remedy , for want of right and want of remedy are
reciprocal

Injuria sine damno covers the tort which are actionable per se, i.e. actionable without the
proof of any damage or loss . For a successful action , the only thing which has to be proved
is that the plaintiff’s legal right has been has been violated, i.e. there is injuria .
 Page 24 of 26

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 www.manupatra.com

 www.google.co.in

 Law Of Tort (John Cook, 7th Edition)

 Ramaswamy Iyer’s - The Law Of Torts ( Tenth Edition)

 Law of Torts (R.K. Bangia)

Page 25 of 26
i