(TITLE)

A PROJECT REPORT
Submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirement for the award of the degree
of
BALLB (Hons.)

by

Lakshit Yadav

(Reg. No -
2420010085)

Department of Law
MANIPAL UNIVERSITY
JAIPUR JAIPUR-303007
RAJASTHAN, INDIA

Month Year
 DEPARTMENT OF LAW
MANIPAL UNIVERSITY JAIPUR, JAIPUR – 303 007 (RAJASTHAN), INDIA

Date

CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project titled PROJECT TITLE is a record of the bonafide
work done by LAKSHIT YADAV (2420010085) submitted in partial fulfilment of the
requirements for the award of the BALLB(Hons.) in School Of Law of Manipal
University Jaipur, during the academic year 2022-23.

Dr. Ashu Maharshi

Project Guide, Dept of (Law)
Manipal University Jaipur

Dr. Sony Kulshrestha

HOD, Dept of (Law)
Manipal University Jaipur

Date
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project entitled PROJECT TITLE was carried out by
LAKSHIT YADAV (Reg. No. 2420010085) at Manipal University Jaipur, Jaipur under
my guidance during Starting Month, 2024 to Ending Month 2024.

Dr. Ashu Maharashi

Associate Assistant
Professor
Manipal University
Jaipur
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This section should contain the acknowledgements due to the Dean/Director, Dept HOD, Project
supervisor, company personnel, department guide, Laboratory Incharge (where the work was carried
out) and faculty members whose assistance was sought during the project work.
 ABSTRACT

The abstract of max 1 page, is a brief synopsis of the project work and should be written in 4
paragraphs.
The first paragraph should outline the importance of the work / topic in the present day
scenario, hence leading to the objective of the project work.
The second paragraph should briefly discuss the methodology that was adopted.
The third paragraph should discuss very-briefly the important results that were obtained and its
significance.
The fourth paragraph should discuss the important tools/software used in the project work.
 LIST OF TABLES
Table No Table Title Page No

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No Figure Title Page No

Note:The border of the table (List of figures,List of table & table of contents) should be invisible
 Contents
Page No
Acknowledgement i
Abstract ii
List Of Tables iii

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Act of God 1
1.2 Inevitable accident
1.3 Comparative Analysis
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
2.1 Legal and Philosophical Exploration
2.2 Doctrine of Force Majeure
. Philosophical Exploration of Act of God
.
.
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Judicial Approach towards Act of God
Judicial Perspectives towards Inevitable Accident
3.2

.
.
.
IMPLEMENTATION
4.1 Role of Natural Forces and Unforeseen Circumstances in Legal Responsibility
4.2 Assessing Liability
.
.
.
RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
. Key Analysis
. Concluding Insights
Contradistinction and Divergence
.

CONCLUSIONS & FUTURE SCOPE

5.1 Denouement
5.2 Pursuable Avenues
REFERENCES
ANNEXURES (OPTIONAL)
 REFERENCES

Journal / Conference Papers

[1] Name 1 and Name 2, “Paper Title”, Full Journal Name, volume no, publication year, page
numbers
[2] Name 1 and Name 2, “Paper Title”, Proceedings of the International / National Conference on
, Institution, Country, Date, page numbers, year

Reference / Hand Books

[1] Name 1, “Book Title”, Publication Name, Edition, ISBN number

Web
[1] Topic 1, website name (do not include long URL’s)Last Accessed date
 Introduction

1.1 Act of God

Damnum Fatale being the auxiliary term for Act of God generally means the
Desuetude and Lament caused by an inevitable accident in a situation that
involved no direct human action. Act of God is an precipitous act it does not
matter how much care there was or any amount of precaution it can not be
dodged or avoided. Ever since the creation of the world there has been the
phenomenon of act of god there have been undefined acts that take places
without any human force interruption or role. In situations like this loss
arises and the pin of harm and good is not balance not that it ever is
nonetheless. It maybe be very dangerous and cause a lot of damage
sometimes irreversible in case of human life. So when the loss arises due to
circumstances that are out of human control or force people opt for the
claims and remedy of Act of God or Force Major or Vis Major. In cases
many times tortfeasors and defendants try to claim or coverup their mistake
by applying act of god on the situation which is not at all right, To claim the
defense of Act of God there should be an instantous cause and to take the
defense of Act of God the situation must be created because of absolutely no
human interruption or any kind of human control it must be absolutely out
the of realm of control of mankind. The defendant’s negligence can not be
condemned as Act of God if the tortfeasor committed an offence and is
liable under Law of Tort and the consequences of his action are because the
act that was committed by the tortfeasor was because of his actions and was
due to humankind then he can not claim Act of God as a defense because the
situation does not qualify for the defense of Act of God. Just because the
humans are capable to articulate and fathom the catastrophes and
conflagrations of Act of God does not mean that they could restrain or
govern it. There is a reason why insurance companies hire comedian because
they need someone who could say Act of God with no smile on their face.
The examples for Act of God are Earthquakes, Flood, Hurricanes, Tornados,
Volcanic Eruptions or Tsunamis etc.
1.2 Inevitable Accident
Inevitable generally means a quagmire or circumstance that can not be
possibly averted or eluded. Even if every mandatory prophylaxis is taken
and every safeguard has been taken into consideration as well still the plight
is created that would be an inevitable accident. Unavoidable accident is
another term used for inevitable accidents. As a defence it says that a person
can not be held liable for a fiasco or crisis which can not be preordained or
anticipated or wasn’t even predictable in the first place even though the
person took every precautionary measure on his rightful conduct. For an
Explanation if a person is driving a car on highway and he is driving well
and is in a sound mind to be driving that car bur due to an failure and fault or
a leak in the brake lines the brake fluid runs out and there is not substantial
brake fluid to disseminate the transmitted pressure from the brake pedal to
the rotating tires hence the brakes not working and failing eventually
because they can not create enough friction on tires to make them stop. The
car loses its control and hit another car on the highway so now the person
who’s car lost control will not be liable because this situation was not under
his control even though he was in his senses he could not have possibly
stopped the car which lost its brake fluid and cant accelerate pressure or
create enough friction unless the person driving the car is The Flash.
Inevitable Accident causes personal injury and the damages are caused
without any fault of the people that are involved in the circumstances. It has
the absence of malicious intent for the tortfeasor. There is a significant
difference between Inevitable Accident and Negligence, When it is a case of
negligence the defendant has a legal duty of care that he breaches and when
this duty gets breached there are consequences in form of damages. The
defendant ignores his duty of care that results into damage. The burden of
proof in case of inevitable accident lies on the defendant while the burden of
proof in case of negligence lies on the plaintiff. The plaintiff has to prove the
defendant was negligent and did not do his duty rightfully as it was said to
be done that caused damage to the plaintiff. While the defendant has the
burden if the defendant wants Inevitable Accident as the defence that the
defendant did everything in his power and took every precautiory measure
still the accident took place. Act of God and Inevitable accident may look
identical on this surface level but there is a note-able difference between the
two given down below.
1.3 Comparative Analysis
As stated above Act of God has no element of human agency involved it is
solely based on the elements that are out of human control. While Inevitable
Accidents takes place due to natural disasters or through human involvement
in the scenario. The nature of event in Act of God is innate and primal also
known as natural but the nature of event of Inevitable Accident can be
exogenous of natural calamity that the act happens even after every
precaution has been already taken. The liability in Act of God is absentia or
missing because humans cannot even comprehend the event that took place
or happened but liability in Inevitable Accident occurs when if the
defendant’s case is not actually under the case of inevitable accident and
more precautionary methods could be used but the defendant did not take
full responsibility and care of the situation and the liability occurred. If the
situation is really a non-fathomable accident and is really every measure had
been taken still the accident takes place or the event occurs than there is no
liability in Inevitable accident. In legality Act of God is used as a defense in
tort and in the law of contract to shun the liability and in the case of
Inevitable Accident specially in Law of tort it is used to prove that the act or
event that took place was not because of negligence. Inevitable accidents
occur due to lack of preventability and human inference while Act of God
has no human contact whatsoever.
 Background Information

2.1 Legal and Philosophical Exploration

Legal Dissection (Act of God) –

As stated, Act of God takes place due to natural causes and causes a
calamity. The Song of Moses which gives a rise to glorious deeds talks about
Act of God. The basic idiom related to act of God means the situation which
is not in human control at all and when it happened or took place it caused
damages and people got hurt both physically and mentally speaking.
In the Law of contract Act of God is a vindication from performing the
contract. For example if a person fails to deliver the goods he was asked and
obliged to deliver as stated in the contract he signed could not deliver the
goods because of a flood or earthquake than he can use the clause of force
majeure which includes natural calamities and Act of God while in
Insurance law the policies that are provided by insurance companies in their
contract for the person they are providing the service to also include Act of
God specially the policies that cover natural disasters. Sometimes it is
argued that if the natural phenomenon was predicted then it is not act of god
because people had time to prepare for it.

Philosophical Exploration (Act of God) –

The philosophical exploration of Act of God triggers cause and effect

relationship of the world of how natural forces can cause utter damage and
how much free will do humans actually have hence another question of
determinism vs free will. Who should be responsible for the occurrence and
how it should be handled at last or does absence of human agency leaves no
room for moral responsibility even though the natural forces are said to be
acting out of human involvement of expansion of human domain causes the
structure imbalance of nature and nurture. Epicurus and David Hume have
corelated the deity and the occurrence of these note-able and significant
phenomenon because with increasing technology and other factors the line
of divergence is often blurred. So, when Act of God is involved principle of
morality and reality grasp should not be erased.
Legal Exploration (Inevitable Accident) -

The principle of Inevitable Accident occurs when the unforeseen happens

abruptly and improvidently leaving no room for termination. There is no
negligence in Inevitable Accident. The involvement of malice and fault is
also not included in the said topic. It is used as a defense in the Legal field.
The doctrine of inevitable accident acts as a defense to a liability meaning
that the tortfeasor rhetorically argues that the accident could not have been
prevented and the accident occurred through no fault of his own. The
defendant also argues that the he had taken every precaution necessary still
the event that happened was out of his control and could not be stopped or
terminated. If the accident or event could have been stopped with greatest
care or if even there was a slightest chance of termination of the event then
the event can not be termed as inevitable accident. If the defendant can prove
that the event was out of his power even with the utmost care then only he
could get a excuse from the liability. If the event is foreseeable at all then
also it can not be termed as inevitable accident. In the milieu of strict
liablility the defendant is still liable even if he was not negligent or he did
not show any sign of negligence, because the environment he was creating
was preternaturally and eccentrically perilous and risk- laden.

Philosophical Perspective (Inevitable Accident) –

The exploration of philosophical perspective also looks into the old concept
of determinism and free will. If the situations are fixed by a deterministic
universe or alternate reality the event must be looked into as inevitable
repercussion which again does not leave any space for moral values or any
kind of legalistic or morally qualified responsibility. The topic of virtue
ethics coined by Aristotle that showcases the dignity and character of the
individual rather than result or consequence of their actions or the activity
they almost did or committed which does not have any value to it to think
about in the second place but huge philosophical approach sometimes deems
fit in the era of psychological malaise or melancholy. Legality of topics aims
to harmonize responsibility and practical considerations while the
philosophical scrutiny delas and lays out the implications of free will and
determinism and the question or moral and legal responsibility.
2.2 Doctrine of Force Majeure

Force majeure can be defined as the conjuncture deriving doctrine beneath

which an subsequent situation may justify liability for negligence given by
subsequent circumstance is unforeseeable and beyond control creates the
performance of an obligation not possible this could actually qualify as a
force majeure event. The defense of force majeure has been trendy since 19th
century, it has a significant distinction between the impossibility of
performance under the Article 61 of Vienna Convention of 1969.