Q.29
Environmental Law Medium Knowledge-Based

The Supreme Court observed, Where an enterprise is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous activity and harm results to anyone on account of an accident in the operation of such hazardous or inherently dangerous activity resulting, for example, 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. In such a case, the measure of compensation must be correlated to the magnitude and capacity of the enterprise because such compensation must have a deterrent effect. The larger and more prosperous the enterprise, the greater must be the amount of compensation payable by it for the harm caused on account of an accident in the carrying on of the hazardous or inherently dangerous activity by the enterprise. Name the case.

A Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, 1991
B Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of U.P ., 1985
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, 1986 Answer
D Union Carbide v. Union of India, 1984
📋

Explanation & Strategy

Click any section to expand · only one open at a time

Under the Constitution, fundamental duties (Article 51A, Part IVA) were added by the 42nd Amendment (1976). They include respecting the Constitution, national flag, defending India, promoting harmony, and protecting the environment.

At a Glance
Subject Environmental Law
Difficulty Medium
Answer (C) Knowledge-Based
Paper AIBE VIII — May 2015
Progress in Paper
Q.29 100 questions

29% through paper