Radhika hired Reality Developers to reconstruct her house with modem architecture. The old building was to be demolished completely. The building was to becovered with a temporary structure to avoid any harm to the surroundings when the minor blast will be executed. However, the intensity of the blast was more than expected and a few pieces of mortar flew to the neighbours house and broke their windows. A piece of mortar stuck the head of one neighbour Lalu in his head and he got injured. Lalu claimed compensation for the injury and the treatment he will have to undergo. Will he succeed in his claims?

Yes, Radhika is Strictly liable to Lalu and should pay compensation.

The basic understanding of negligence is that wrong-doer or the defendant has been careless in a way that harms the interest of the victim or the claimant. For example, when the defendant carries out an act of constructing something on her premises, she owes a duty of care towards the claimant and that the standard of duty of care depends on whether the claimant was on the site or in the neighborhood as well as whether the claimant was a lawful visitor or a trespasser. Generally, in order to argue successfully that the defendant has been negligent, the victim or the claimant must establish three elements against the defendant in a tort of negligence case - 1) the defendant owes a duty of care to the victim; 2) there has been a breach of duty of care on part of the defendant; and 3) the breach of the duty to care resulted in the harm suffered by the claimant.