During the municipal council elections in Nagpur, Ramesh, a registered and eligible voter, reached the polling booth to cast his vote. However, the presiding officer refused to allow Ramesh to vote, despite him having va

It is not that every damage is a damage in the eye of the law. It must be a damage which the law recognises as such. In other words, there should be a legal injury or invasion of the legal right. In the absence of an infringement of a legal right, an action does not lie. Also, where there is infringement of a legal right, an action lies even though no damage may have been caused. As was stated in Ashby v. White, (1703) 2 Ld. Raym. 938 legal damage is neither identical with actual damage nor is it necessarily pecuniary. Two maxims explain this proposition: Damnum sine injuria (Damage without injury), and Injuria sine damnum (injury without damage). The given situation can be governed by the rule of Injuria Sine Damnum . It means injury without damage, i.e., where there is no damage resulted, yet it is an injury or wrong in tort, i.e., where there is an infringement of a legal right not resulting in harm but plaintiff can still sue in tort. Injuria sine Damnum covers such cases and for which action lies where the right is violated even though no damage has occurred. Some rights or interests are so important that their violation is an actionable tort without proof of damage. Thus, when there is an invasion of an "absolute" private right of an individual, there is an injuria and the plaintiff's action will succeed even if there is no damnum or damages. An absolute right is one, the violation of which is actionable per se, i.e., without the proof of any damage. In the given situation, Ramesh's legal right to vote, being a registered voter, was denied by the presiding officer. Even though he suffered no monetary loss and the election result remained unchanged, the violation of this absolute right constitutes a complete tort. In the case of Ashby v. White , the court held that wrongful prevention from voting, even without monetary loss, is actionable. Therefore, Ramesh is entitled to claim damages under the Law of Torts as his absolute legal right to vote was infringed.