DEVADOSS
Ramasubbier – Appellant
Versus
Shenbagaratnam – Respondent
Devadoss, J.
1. The first point is as regards the cornice of the defendants house. The contention in the lower Court was that the defendant was entitled to have the cornice projecting to the extent to which the foundation extended into the lane, The plaintiff is entitled under Ex. A, to a breadth of 19 feet, 3 inches east to west including the site of the lane. According to the commissioners measurement the breadth including the lane is 19 feet, 4 3/4 inches. This difference is owing to the space left by the defendant when the western wall of his house was put up, that is, he left 1 3/4 inches space when he built the wall. That space the defendant is entitled to use for projecting his cornice. The plumb line from the western edge of the cornice down to the ground, is 5 7/8 inches outside the defendants wall. He is entitled to project his cornice to the extent of 3 inches beyond his wall as he has left 1 inches at ground level and the rest at the basement, and anything beyond is an encroachment. The defendant has, therefore, encroached on the plaintiffs land to the extent of 2 7/8 inches.
2. In the lower Court the defendant rested his case on the ground that the foundation ext
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.