Question

In M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC1086 (Sri Ram Fertilizers case) the court held that:

• A. In escape of toxic gas the enterprise is strictly and absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any of the exceptions which operate vis-a-vis the tortious principle of strict liability.
• B. In escape of a dangerous animal the owner is strictly and absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any of the exceptions which operate vis-a-vis the tortious principle of strict liability.
• C. In escape of toxic gas the enterprise is strictly liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is subject to any of the exceptions which operate vis-a-vis the tortious principle of strict liability.
• D. A company or a corporation is not a state and hence not liable for leak of toxic gas affecting the health of the people

Hint:

In the M.C. Mehta case, the court held that enterprises causing toxic gas leaks are strictly and absolutely liable without exception under the principle of strict liability.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Step 1: Understanding the Case.
The M.C. Mehta Vs. Union of India case dealt with the issue of strict liability in case of hazardous industrial accidents, such as the escape of toxic gases. The Supreme Court held that the enterprise is strictly and absolutely liable for such accidents and cannot claim any exceptions that are available in the general tortious principle of strict liability.
Step 2: Explanation of the options.
- (a) In escape of toxic gas the enterprise is strictly and absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any of the exceptions which operate vis-a-vis the tortious principle of strict liability: This is the correct answer, as it reflects the principle of strict and absolute liability established in the case.
- (b) In escape of a dangerous animal the owner is strictly and absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any of the exceptions: This is incorrect, as this pertains to the tort of strict liability and is not the subject of this case.
- (c) In escape of toxic gas the enterprise is strictly liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is subject to any of the exceptions: This is incorrect, as the case established that no exceptions apply.
- (d) A company or a corporation is not a state and hence not liable for leak of toxic gas affecting the health of the people: This is incorrect, as the case specifically dealt with the liability of companies in such situations.
Step 3: Conclusion.
Thus, the correct answer is (a) In escape of toxic gas the enterprise is strictly and absolutely liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any of the exceptions.