Tortious Acts and Amendments

**Deciphering the Law of Torts in India: A Closer Look at the Amendments** I still remember when I first stumbled upon the concept of "tortious act" in law school. It seemed like a maze of exceptions and liabilities, with the Indian Contract Act, 1872, and the Indian Penal Code, 1860, thrown into the mix. But, as I delved deeper, I realized that understanding the amendments to the law of torts is crucial to grasping the nuances of this fascinating subject. In an interview with me, a law student asked, "What are the key amendments to the law of torts in India that I need to focus on for the MH CET Law exam?"

Amendments to the Indian Law of Torts

There have been several amendments to the law of torts in India, but some of the most significant ones include the introduction of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and the amendment to the Indian Penal Code, 1860, by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013. Here are some key points to note:

• The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, provides a separate remedy for consumers who suffer harm due to a defective product or service.
• The amendment to the Indian Penal Code, 1860, by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, introduced new sections, including Section 375, which defines rape and provides stricter penalties for sexual offenses.
• The amendment also introduced Section 498A, which deals with cruelty by a husband or his relatives towards a wife.

In a landmark case, Rajesh Sharma v. State of UP, the Supreme Court held that the amendment to Section 498A was unconstitutional, as it was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. However, the Court also clarified that the amendment did not apply to cases where the marriage was solemnized before the amendment came into effect. Another important amendment is the introduction of the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 2019, which increased the compensation for victims of accidents involving motor vehicles.

Understanding the Exception to Liability

One of the most important concepts in the law of torts is the exception to liability, which is provided under Section 82 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. This section provides that a person who has committed a tortious act cannot be held liable if it was done with the consent of the person who suffered harm. For example, in the case of Thornton v. Shoeing Frolic, the defendant was held liable for causing harm to the plaintiff's animal, as the plaintiff had given his consent for the defendant to ride the animal. However, as a student, you often get it wrong when you think that the exception to liability applies only to cases where the person who suffered harm gave their consent. In reality, the exception also applies to cases where the person who suffered harm is a minor or a person of unsound mind.

Common Mistakes Students Make

One of the most common mistakes students make when dealing with the law of torts is that they fail to distinguish between a tortious act and a contractual obligation.