The court emphasized the need for evidence supporting apprehensions, consideration of operation details, and the balance between private and public interests in environmental protection cases.

1. The second defendant in O.S.No.756 of 2005 on the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Namakkal, who is the second respondent in I.A.No.1949 of 2005 is the petitioner in the above C.R.P.

2. The first respondent herein filed O.S.No.756 of 2005 against the second respondent herein and the petitioner herein seeking a decree for permanent injunction restraining the defendants in the suit from installing powerful generator at the place of marked as 'D' in the sketch filed along with the plaint as the same affects the peace of the public and the plaintiff and causes polluted atmosphere.

3. Pending the suit, the plaintiff filed I.A.No.1949 for interim injunction. The trial Court dismissed the application for interim injunction and being aggrieved by that the first respondent herein preferred an appeal in C.M.A.No.25 of 2006 before the Sub Court, Namakkal. The Sub Court, Namakkal, allowed the appeal and granted interim injunction and being aggrieved by that the second defendant has filed the above C.R.P.

4. The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of the above C.R.P. are set out below:-

a. In the plaint it is stated that the suit has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff as well as on behalf of the villagers of Maduraiveeran Pudur of Periapatti Village.

b. The case of the plaintiff/first respondent herein is that the plaintiff and the villagers have put up their own house and peacefully living in the Village. While so, the second defendant had taken on lease the site belonged to the first defendant for the purpose of installing the cell phone tower and the second defendant without getting the consent of the residents of the Village, has taken steps to instal the cell phone tower and a powerful generator. In the plaint sketch, the place marked as 'P' is the place where the plaintiff and other villagers constructed their houses and the place where the cell phone tower and the generator to be installed is marked as 'D' which is situated on the eastern side of the plaintiff's house.

c. The plaintiff apprehends that if the powerful generator is installed, it will cause danger to the residents of that area; some days earlier to the installation of the cell phone tower by the second defendant, several cell phone towers fell down due to heavy rains. The cell phone tower and the generator to be installed by the second defendant may fell down and cause danger to the residents of that area. The further apprehension of the plaintiff is that if the powerful generator is installed, it will emanate hot air and black smoke which will cause inconvenience to the plaintiff and the general public. It will also cause diseases and will affect the peace of the plaintiff and the public.

5. The very same averments have been stated in the affidavit filed in support of the I.A.No.1949 of 2005. 6. The second defendant/petitioner herein filed a detailed counter statement and an additional counter statement inter alia contending as follows:-

a. The apprehension of the plaintiff that hot air and black smoke will be emanated from the generator and that will cause unnecessary problems to the plaintiff and the public is unfounded and there is absolutely no basis for alleging that it may cause diseases and it will affect the peace of the residents.

b. The sketch filed by the plaintiff is not correct and the cell phone tower and the generator are to be located 10 feet away on the east of the plaintiff's property. The site wherein the cell phone tower to be installed belongs to the first defendant and she is entitled to lease out the same.

c. After taking the site belonging to the first defendant on a long lease and after obtaining necessary orders from the authorities, the second defendant installed the cell phone tower and the generator.

d. Strong foundation has been laid with concrete materials and as such there is absolutely no possibility for the cell phone tower to fall down. The allegation that the powerful generator is to be inst