Question:medium

The Railway authorities allowed a train to be over crowded. In consequence, a legitimate passenger Mr. X got his pocket picked. Choose the appropriate answer:

Show Hint

Loss alone is not enough to sue. Ask which legal right of Mr. X the Railways actually broke, and remember the maxim damnum sine injuria.
Updated On: Jul 17, 2026
  • Mr. X can sue the Railway authorities for the loss suffered
  • Mr. X cannot sue because he had given his consent to travel in a over-crowded train
  • Mr. X cannot sue railway authorities because there was no infringement of his legal right and mere fact that the loss was caused does not give rise to a cause of action
  • None of these
Show Solution

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

Start by separating two words that look alike but do very different work in tort law. "Damage" is the harm or loss a person actually suffers, counted in rupees. "Injury" is the breaking of a legal right that belongs to that person. A civil suit is built on injury, not on damage. Mr. X's pocket was picked, so his damage is obvious. The whole case turns on whether the Railways broke any right of his.

  1. Mr. X can sue the Railway authorities for the loss suffered: Wrong, because it treats the size of the loss as the trigger for liability. The Railways did not take his money. The thief did. Letting the train get crowded is not the breach of any right that the law hands to an individual passenger, so there is nothing to sue on.
  2. Mr. X cannot sue because he had given his consent to travel in a over-crowded train: This reaches the right result through the wrong door. Consent, or volenti non fit injuria, works only where a person knowingly accepts a known risk of harm from the defendant. Boarding a packed train is not agreeing to be robbed, and no passenger consents to a crime being committed on him. So consent is not the reason the suit fails.
  3. Mr. X cannot sue railway authorities because there was no infringement of his legal right and mere fact that the loss was caused does not give rise to a cause of action: This states the rule of damnum sine injuria exactly, damage without the breach of a legal right. It correctly identifies that Mr. X has damage but no injury, and that the immediate wrongdoer is the pickpocket, whose independent criminal act stands between the crowding and the loss.
  4. None of these: Cannot apply, since option (C) already carries the sound reasoning.

So the answer is option (C). Compare the mirror rule, injuria sine damno, seen in Ashby v. White, where a voter was wrongly stopped from voting, lost nothing in money terms, and still won, because his legal right was broken. Mr. X is the reverse picture: loss in his pocket, no right of his broken by the Railways.

Let's summarize:

  • Damnum sine injuria means loss without the violation of a legal right, and it is not actionable.
  • Injuria sine damno means violation of a legal right without loss, and it is actionable.
  • Mr. X's remedy, if any, lies against the pickpocket who wronged him, not against the Railways.

Since no legal right of Mr. X was infringed by the Railways, the loss gives him no cause of action, making option (C) correct.

Was this answer helpful?
0

Top Questions on Law of Torts

Questions Asked in CLAT exam

Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage (extract): The work which Gandhiji had taken up was not only regarding the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a new social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood and maximum freedom for all. A new order cannot be established without radically changing the mind and attitude of men towards property and, at some stage or the other, the 'haves' have to yield place to the 'have-nots'. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force. It may even be that, like a gas kept confined within containers under great pressure, or water held back by a big dam, once the barrier breaks, the reaction will one day sweep back with a violence equal in extent and intensity to what was used to establish and maintain the outward egalitarian form. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction. If egalitarianism is to endure, it has to be based not on the possession of the maximum material goods by a few or by all but on voluntary, enlightened renunciation of those goods which cannot be shared by others or can be enjoyed only at the expense of others.

According to the passage, egalitarianism will not survive if
View Solution
Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage (extract): The work which Gandhiji had taken up was not only regarding the achievement of political freedom but also the establishment of a new social order based on truth and non-violence, unity and peace, equality and universal brotherhood and maximum freedom for all. This unfinished part of his experiment was perhaps even more difficult to achieve than the achievement of political freedom. In the political struggle, the fight was against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his/her moral support. In establishing a social order on this pattern, there was a strong possibility of a conflict arising between diverse groups and classes of our own people.

According to the passage, which was the unfinished part of Gandhi's experiment?
View Solution
Read the passage and answer the question.

Passage (extract): In the political struggle, the fight was against a foreign power and all one could do was either join it or wish it success and give it his/her moral support. Experience shows that man values his possessions even more than his life because in the former he sees the means for perpetuation and survival of his descendants even after his body is reduced to ashes. We have seen, in our time, attempts to achieve a kind of egalitarian society and the picture of it after it was achieved. But this was done, by and large, through the use of physical force. This enforced egalitarianism contains, in its bosom, the seed of its own destruction. The root cause of class conflict is possessiveness or the acquisitive instinct.

Which of the following statements is 'not true' in the context of the passage?
View Solution