Nuisance as a tort is divided into two categories, private nuisance and public nuisance, which have their own scope of conduct and types of harm.

Private nuisance, in which the defendant’s behavior “causes substantial and unreasonable interference with the claimant’s land or his use or enjoyment of the land” and public nuisance, in which the defendant’s conduct “seriously affects reasonable comfort Public nuisance is also a crime.

The difference between private nuisance and public nuisance

Private nuisance –
Private nuisance affects people more than the whole world It makes people suffer The affected person enjoys the right to “rights of personality. “When the defendant’s behavior only affects the claimant’s enjoyment of land and property and does not affect other people, private nuisance occurs. Technically speaking, when one person’s actions affect another person and prevent them from exercising all rights to their property. It does not affect anyone other than the plaintiff.
Then, the claimant can demand compensation for unagreeed damages, taking into account the seriousness of the injury, make a decision and pay compensation.
The basis of private nuisance illegal or unreasonable interference. This kind of interference will only cause legal damage to the plaintiff. The injury may be due to the plaintiff’s property or physical discomfort.

Public Nuisance –
Public Nuisance To put it simply, Public Nuisance is defined as an unreasonable and illegal act of the defendant, causing substantial nuisance and legal damage to the public. When the defendant’s behavior has a negative impact on the public, it will come into play. In Birmingham’s words, it is a public hazard. The defendant’s behavior “severely affected the reasonable comfort and convenience of your Majesty’s subjects.”
Public hazard belongs to the category of criminal acts under Indian law. The reason for criminalizing this crime is that it was committed against the public and therefore violated any of their legal rights. In addition, any crime under the IPC is committed against the public and the country, and the similarity of the affected parties also puts public nuisance in the criminal field.

Public Nuisance is a crime in both Indian and British laws and is mentioned in various laws and regulations of the country. It is possible to provide a legal summary that regards public nuisance as a crime rather than a simple tort, such as Article 3 (48), Article
Of the General Principles Law, which gives the meaning of various legal terms, among which the definition of public nuisance is Fully given in accordance with the Indian Penal Code.

Section 268 of the Indian Penal Code defines public nuisance as “an illegal act or omission that causes any harm, danger, or common annoyance to ordinary people living or occupying nearby property, or that must cause harm, opposition, danger, or possible People who have the opportunity to use any public rights cause distress.”
Therefore, any behavior that seriously interferes with public health, safety, comfort and convenience, or damages public morals, is considered a public nuisance.
In order to avoid civil and the multiplicity of criminal proceedings (Res Judicata) and public nuisance generally do not allow civil proceedings to be instituted in accordance with the provisions of the criminal law. Although public nuisance has occurred against the public, it does not prevent individuals from filing private lawsuits, if he succeeds in showing that he is facing special injuries that are different from those faced by the general public. This special damage is substantial in nature. This special damage is caused by the direct actions of the respondent.
Illustration 1 Mr. A’s confusion caused by his cattle obstructed the public road. At the same time, one of the cows broke into another Mr. B’s house and damaged his television.
In this case, although Mr. A is subject to legal proceedings due to the roadblock public hazard, Mr. B can claim separate damages for the special damage he faced due to property loss.

Case law
In the Attorney General V. At the PYA Quarry, the court held that even if the vibration of the defendant’s property was extensive in nature, it would cause public nuisance.

Aishwarya Says:

I have always been against Glorifying Over Work and therefore, in the year 2021, I have decided to launch this campaign “Balancing Life”and talk about this wrong practice, that we have been following since last few years. I will be talking to and interviewing around 1 lakh people in the coming 2021 and publish their interview regarding their opinion on glamourising Over Work.

If you are interested in participating in the same, do let me know.

Do follow me on Facebook, Twitter  Youtube and Instagram.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems at adv.aishwaryasandeep@gmail.com

We also have a Facebook Group Restarter Moms for Mothers or Women who would like to rejoin their careers post a career break or women who are enterpreneurs.