https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189726 Article 32 was read as extending beyond preventive relief to remedial compensation where a fundamental right has already been violated, and the Court accepted liberal locus standi and epistolary jurisdiction for public-spirited bodies acting for victims unable to approach the Court directly. The note also states that enterprises engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities owe an absolute and non-delegable duty to compensate for harm caused by accidents in the course of such activity. Liability was treated as independent of fault and as a distinct rule adapted to modern industrial risk, replacing reliance on the traditional Rylands v. Fletcher framework for such enterprises. en-us Sat, 20 Dec 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Jan 2017 17:38:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189726 Article 32 was read as extending beyond preventive relief to remedial compensation where a fundamental right has already been violated, and the Court accepted liberal locus standi and epistolary jurisdiction for public-spirited bodies acting for victims unable to approach the Court directly. The note also states that enterprises engaged in hazardous or inherently dangerous activities owe an absolute and non-delegable duty to compensate for harm caused by accidents in the course of such activity. Liability was treated as independent of fault and as a distinct rule adapted to modern industrial risk, replacing reliance on the traditional Rylands v. Fletcher framework for such enterprises. Case-Laws Indian Laws Sat, 20 Dec 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189726