Question

Principle: Nobody shall make use of his property in such a way as to cause damage to others. Any such use constitutes private nuisance, a wrongful act under the law of torts.

Factual Situation: Vasan owned a house, adjacent to a cluster of houses, owned by Varadan. Varadan was leasing out these houses, whereas Vasan was living in his house. When Vasan was transferred to another place, he leased out his house to a person suffering from AIDS. Fearing the spread of AIDS, the tenants moved out of Varadan's houses. Varadan requested Vasan to evict the AIDS patient and he offered to fix a suitable tenant for Vasan's house, if the AIDS patient is evicted. But Vasan refused by arguing that AIDS would not spread as feared by Vardan's tenants. Vardan filed a suit against Vasan.

• A. Varadan will win, because Vasan knowingly caused him financial damage.
• B. Varadan will not win, because Vasan could lease his house to whoever he wanted.
• C. Varadan will not win, because Vasan should not be held responsible for public's misconception.
• D. None of the above.

Answer 1

Answer: (C)

Varadan will not win, because Vasan should not be held responsible for public's misconception.

In the given situation, the act of Vasan, i.e. renting out his house to an AIDS patient is not a wrongful act under the law of torts. The AIDS patient has all the legal rights equal to other normal people. If at all Vasan would have rented his house for any illegal activities then Varadan's objections would be valid, but here it is not so. Hence Varadan's suit against Vasan will not lead to his victory in court.

Hence, the correct option is C.