Question

Principle: In case where there is an infringement of legal right even without any actual loss or damage, the person whose right is infringed has a cause of action.
Facts: 'P' was wrongfully prevented by the Returning officer from exercising his vote in an assembly election. Still he ('P') brought an action claiming damages. Which of the following derivations is correct?

• A. 'P' would succeed in his action, as it is mandatory to cast vote.
• B. 'P' would succeed in his action, as he was wrongfully prevented from exercising his legal right of voting in that election.
• C. 'P' would not succeed in his action, as he did not suffer any loss in that election.
• D. 'P' would not succeed in his action, as the candidate for whom he wanted to give his vote won the election.

Hint:

Infringement of legal rights, even without loss, gives rise to a cause of action.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

The principle states that an infringement of legal rights, even without actual loss, gives the person whose right is infringed a cause of action. Here, 'P' was wrongfully prevented from exercising his right to vote, which is a legal right. Thus, he is entitled to bring an action for damages despite not suffering any actual loss.


Option (A) 'P' would succeed in his action, as it is mandatory to cast vote: This is incorrect. While voting is a right, the issue here is the wrongful prevention of the exercise of this right.

Option (C) 'P' would not succeed in his action, as he did not suffer any loss in that election: This is incorrect. The principle allows for a claim even without loss if the legal right is infringed.

Option (D) 'P' would not succeed in his action, as the candidate for whom he wanted to give his vote won the election: This is incorrect. The violation of his right to vote is sufficient grounds for the action, regardless of the election outcome.