The purpose of this study is to examine the possibility of the compensation for the literary damage in the Comparative Legal System and in the Omani Legal System by answering the following inquiries: The Islamic Law attitude to the doctrine of the Literary Damage. The contemporary legal scholars towards the doctrine of the Literary Damage. The Omani Old Doctrine attitude to this principle, and the extent of harmony between the Omani Lawmaker and the Judicial practices with the Omani Old Doctrine. In order to answer these inquiries, the researcher has conducted some studies on the clash point between the Islamic Old Doctrine which supports the principle of the Literary Damage, and the contemporary scholars who disagree with this principle. As a result of this research, it has been revealed that the Islamic Law realized the authenticity of the Literary Damage since the early stage of Islam and that is why it was a must to compensate it. It has been proved so by religious evidences from the Holy Book, Hadith, the Companions of the Prophet, and the statements of some of the old scholars, particularly the Old Omani Doctrine which compensated the Literary Damage in its all forms. The most important results this study has reached: the debate of the possibility of the Literary Damage Compensation has emerged during the time of the contemporary Law jurists immediately after they divided the damage into two types: materialistic and literary. The problem of the literary damage compensation has become worse when the scholars adopted Imam Al-Ghazaly definition of liability. The Old Omani Doctrine supports the literary damage. It is clear from studying the draft law of civil transactions that the Omani Legislation refrained from approving the principle of compensating literary damage. After examining the judicial practices in courts, it became clear that they swing between a supporter and a objector to the principle of literary damage.