Question

Principle: Any person who for his own purposes brings on his lands and collects and keeps there anything that is likely to cause mischief if it escapes must keep it at his peril, and if he does not do so, is prima facie responsible for all damages, irrespective of his fault, which is the natural consequence of its escape in respect of non-natural use of land.
Fact: Nisha owns a large water tank on her property, which she uses for irrigation. The tank is well-maintained and periodically serviced. One night, due to an unusual surge in water pressure from the municipal supply, the tank overflows. The excess water damages Raj’s garden and seeps into his house, causing structural damage. Raj sues Nisha for damages. Will he succeed?

• A. Yes, Nisha is liable for damages caused by tank overflow, regardless of fault.
• B. Yes, Nisha is liable as she stored a large quantity of water on her property and should have foreseen the possibility of variation in the pressure of municipal water supply.
• C. No, the overflow was a result of the surge in municipal water pressure.
• D. No, the overflow was a result of an unforeseeable circumstance.

Hint:

In strict liability cases, fault is not required for liability; the risk alone makes one liable.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

The principle establishes strict liability for damage caused by the escape of something likely to cause mischief if it escapes. Nisha is liable for the overflow, regardless of whether the surge was foreseeable or not.