Reshaping Tortious Liablity Of State

Sejal Makkad | Amity Law School, Amity University Chhattisgarh | 31st May 2020

Jai Laxmi Salt Works Ltd. v The State of Gujarat 1994 (3) SCC 492

Facts: 

The government of Gujarat constructed a “bundh” near Jai Laxmi Salt Waters Works. The bundh was con structed by the government to decrease the risk of water risk of change in the course of water. The flow of water was in such a direction that it could enter the premises of the claimant’s property and cause losses to them.

The claimant asked the government to take care of it and to reconstruct it in such a way that it did not cause harm to anyone. The request was not looked after and the water overflowed and entered the claimants’ property causing irreparable losses to them. The claimant then approached the court of law in order to claim damages from the government.

Issues: 

1. Whether the suit was time barred under section 36 or 120 of the Limitation Act?
2. Whether the overflowing of water resulted in strict liability?

Judgement: 

The Government was held liable as the construction of bundh was a natural use of land and the government was liable to pay the compensation. The government was also requested about the removal of the bundh but they did not take it into consideration. The government also breached its duty of care towards its people and that cannot be ignored.

The issue about the limitation period was also sorted as the court said that the claim can be done from the date of injury occurred or from the date when the suit got rejected in the lower courts and that’s why the suit was not barred under the provisions of limitation act.

Significance: 

The judgement has a significant over the fact that the government cannot run away from its duties has to take care of public while doing any action. Any wrong done by the government cannot be ignored and the government has compensated for its wrongs.