R.BALASUBRAMANIAN
E. Preman – Appellant
Versus
M. P. Andy – Respondent
In this revision Petition the revision petitioner is challenging the order dated 212. 1986 in Reference No.5066/02/85 on the file of the Court of the Sub Divisional Magistrate (Executive), Mahe. A few facts are essential to be stated in this case. The revision petitioner and the sole respondent are neighbours. There is admittedly a tree situated in the house of the revision petitioner. On 29. 1985 the respondent gave a complaint to the Executive Magistrate, complaining that the existence of the tree in the hours of the revision petitioner is a source of nuisance not only to his personnel safety but also to his property. In other words him grievance was that the tree is situated in such a manner that it is likely to fall at any time on his house and thereby cause danger to his personal safety as well as damages to the property. On this basis he moved the Executive Magistrate to take appropriate steps to protect him.
2. The Executive Magistrate passed an order under Sec.133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 12. 1985, directing the removal of the tree as a whole. Thereafter, the revision Petitioner filed a petition before the Sub Divisional Magistrate stating that the pet
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.