SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Ker) 358

S.MARIMUTHU
Thressiamma, alias Valsamma – Appellant
Versus
Sebastian Mathew, alias Sunny – Respondent


Advocates:
O. V. Radhakrishnan, for Appellant; Abraham Mathew, for Respondent.

Judgement

ORDER :- This appeal has arisen questioning the judgment and decree delivered by the Sub Judge, Pala in A.S. No. 14 of 1998.

2. Appellant as plaintiff filed O.S. No. 29 of 1997 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Ettumenoor for a relief restraining the defendant, respondent herein, from constructing the factory for the manufacturing of cement cavity box in plaint item No. 2 of the respondent, lying on western side on the following averments. Appellant is the owner of plaint item No. 1 which is lying on the eastern side. The respondent is attempting to construct a factory for the manufacturing of cement cavity box in his property. He has left only 5 metes. If the respondent is

permitted to put up such a construction for the manufacturing of the bricks, such factory will pollute the atmosphere, would cause Asthma to the husband of the appellant and would affect the education of the students, studying in the college and such pollution would also impair the hearing of the people residing in the locality.

3. Suit was resisted by the respondent on the ground that the averments found in the plaint are totally inadmissible, only on getting report from the Factory Inspector, getting c




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top