A tree growing on X’s land suddenly collapses due to the fault of X and falls on to the adjacent land of X and injures Y. Can Y recover damages from X? Give reasons for your answer.
Here, X is not liable for damages. Y cannot recover damages from X.
The reasons are as follows:
- Rule in Ryland Vs. Flectcher says that if any person keeps any dangerous things, he keep them at his peril. If anything escapes and causes damage, then the owner is liable even in the absence of negligence.
- The given case falls under one of the exceptions to the above rule.
- The rule in Rylands Vs. Flectcher is applicable only to things which a person keeps in his land. But if damage is caused by anything which is naturally attached to the land, the owner is not liable.
- According to the above principle, in the given case, as the damage was caused due to the fall of tree which is a thing attached to the land, X is not liable.
- The given case resembles the facts of well-known case Noble Vs. Harrison. In this case, the branch of a tree in the defendant’s land fell on the plaintiff. Held he was not liable.