A neighbor dispute regarding dangerous trees in petitioners' property. The court disposed of the writ petition by modifying the Revenue Divisional Officer's order to allow respondents to cut trees while petitioners retain timber.
The RDO order (Ext.P5) to be modified to allow respondents to cut trees with timber for petitioners.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI
THURSDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2009 / 5TH BHADRA 1931
WP(C).No. 17185 of 2009(P)
PETITIONERS: ---------------
BY ADV. SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU
SRI.T.G.KALADHARAN
SRI.ELDHO K.MATHEW
RESPONDENTS:
BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.P.N SANTHOSH
ADV. SRI.JAISON JOSEPH FOR R3
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
V.GIRI,J.
W.P ( C) No.17185 of 2009
Dated this the 27th August,2009
J U D G M E N T
Petitioners and respondents 2 and 3 are neighbours. It seems that a dispute had arisen between petitioners on one hand and the 2nd respondent on the other regarding trees situated in the petitioners' property dangerously posed over the property of the 2nd respondent. It is contended that there was a settlement and later, the 3rd respondent purchased the property from the 2nd respondent. Dispute again arose between the petitioners and 3rdd respondent. Petitioners insisted that they will remove the trees standing on the eastern boundary of the petitioners property, but expenses will have to meet by the 3rd respondent. It is contended that there was an agreement on this issue, but later the 3rd respondent resisted from the same. The 3rd respondent later approached the RDO with a complaint that trees standing in the property of the petitioners posed a danger to her house and the inmates of the house. By Ext.P5 an order
W.P ( C) No.17185 of 2009
2
was passed by the RDO requiring the petitioner to cut and remove those trees . The said order has been challenged in this writ petition.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
(V.GIRI,JUDGE)
ma
W.P ( C) No.17185 of 2009
3
W.P ( C) No.17185 of 2009
4
W.P ( C) No.17185 of 2009
5
MR. VASU AND ANR
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
VENUKUMAR
MERCY JOHN
V.GIRI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
