IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.06.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M. JOTHIRAMAN AS.No.556 of 2019

1.V.N.Devadoss

2.D.Padma … appellants / plaintiffs V.

1.M/s.Ben Foundations Pvt Ltd Rep by its Managing Director Mr.Rajan Dev

2.Mr.Rajan Dev … respondents / defendants Prayer : This First Appeal is filed under Section 96 r/w.Order 41 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure 1908 against the judgment and decree dated 28.08.2018 passed in OS.No.350 of 2007 on the file of the II Additional District Judge, Thiruvallur at Poonamallee.

For Appellants : Mr.R.Bharath Kumar For Respondents : Mr.R.Syed Mustafa

J U D G M E N T

Unsuccessful plaintiffs have preferred the appeal. Suit is filed for claiming compensation for damaging the compound wall for a sum of Rs.15,00,000/- with interest at 18% per annum. The trial Court dismissed the suit. The parties are herein after referred to as per their litigative status before the trial Court.

2. The brief case of the plaintiffs is as follows :-

The plaintiffs are the absolute owners of the vacant land of the suit schedule property. The defendants are carrying on business in real estate promoting residential flats. The defendants had constructed the compound wall with RCC columns and beams surrounding their property. The foundation for the compound wall was 1 foot diameter with reamed piles for a depth of 13 feet from the plaintiffs premises having an average ground level i.e.,98.00m and the center to center of pile is 8 feet and 9 inch thick brickwork was filled in between the beams and the expansion joint is filled with mastic pad. The plaintiffs constructed the compound wall before two years. The defendants constructed the compound wall in their premises abutting plaintiffs compound wall. The compound wall constructed by the plaintiff has been designed and provided only for its self weight and cannot withstand any lateral road i.e.,road pressure. The defendants have dumped the earth, sand and gravel in the land belonging to them and also applied pressure on the compound by providing car driveway near the compound wall. The defendants and their men had not taken proper precaution while putting the load on the compound wall belonging to the plaintiffs. As a result, the compound wall collapsed and fell down for a length of 227 feet besides damaging compound wall for a length of 84 feet from south and for a length of 122 feet on the east side and 163 feet on the west side on 28.10.2006.

2(i). The plaintiffs called upon the defendants on 29.102006 to rectify the damages, but they have not chosen to do so. The plaintiff issued notice to the defendants on 22.11.2006 calling upon them to rectify the damages. The said notice was retuned unserved and again a notice was issued on 09.12.2006 which was also returned with an endorsement “left”. The plaintiff had incurred a cost of Rs.15,00,000/- for construction of the compound wall which the defendants are liable to pay the compensation for damaging the compound wall and to restore the compound wall to its original condition. Hence, the suit.

3. The brief case of the defendants is as follows : -

Suit is filed only based on assumptions and presumptions and also imaginations without any material evidence which cannot be sustainable in the eye of law. The defendants is carrying on their business of construction and promoting residential flats in and around Chennai and as such they have also undertaken one of the projects at Padikuppam Road at Nolambur village and the project has been completed in the year 2005 itself and the possession of the residential flats have also been handed over to the owners who have purchased their respective flats. The defendants are not aware of the quality of the alleged damaged compound wall. The defendants never constructed the compound wall by abetting the plaintiffs compound wall as alleged in the plaint. None of the adjacent property owners are affected in this regard and none preferred any complaint to the defendants