ISSUE:
Whether the appellant’s negligence to take care of the molasses tank was the direct cause of the damage to the crop or whether the damage causes was too remote in respect to an independent event?
Whether the proof backs the compensation of Rs 14,700 as a just compensation with respect to the damages?
RULE:
The principle of legal causation with respect to liability and quantification of damages of the neighbor principle indicates that an individual must not only take utmost care but should also ensure to not inflict injury recklessly.
The rule of strict liability requires that the person storing non natural things on their land owes a duty in the situation that the things stores escapes and inflicts damages to others.
The principle of “novus actus interveniens” (intervention of a new act) is applicable only when it can be proved that the act was caused by a stranger.