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

1992 Supreme(Ker) 460

CHETTUR SANKARAN NAIR
Kalyani – Appellant
Versus
Bhaskaran – Respondent


JUDGMENT

Chettur Sankaran Nair, J.

1. This Appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the Judgement and Decree of the Courts below, rejecting her claim for lateral support. Plaintiff runs a School since 1968 in Survey No. 1054 of Kandanassery Village, described as A schedule property in the plaint. Defendants own lands to the west and north of plaintiff's property, described as B scheduled property, in the plaint. Plaintiff submits that defendants had been making large scale excavation of earth from their property, cutting earth in a perpendicular. As a result of this, plaintiffs property has lost lateral support available from the adjacent land of defendants, submits plaintiff. Hence a suit for mandatory and prohibitory injunction was filed.

2. Defendants admitted removal of earth, but contended the plaintiff lost lateral support, if at all, by putting pressure on her land by heaping earth on the playground, and not by any act of the defendants. They submit further that S.7 of the Indian Easement Act, stands in the way of plaintiff claiming lateral support, after subjecting her land to artificial pressure.

3. The Suit was dismissed by the trial court. On Appeal (A.S.2/81), the Distri





































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