MANEYAPANDA MADAPPA Vs. KUTTANDA KARIAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Coorg, Meracara in O. S. No. 36 of 1959, decreeing the suit filed, by the respondent claiming damages from the appellant to the extent of Rs. 700/- only with a further direction that the appellant should pay costs of the respondent on the sum of Rs. 700/-as damages.

(2.) The respondent filed a suit against the appellant claiming damages of Rs. 6,000/- in respect of the destruction said to have been caused to his orange garden on account of the fire started by the appellant in his garden which is adjacent to the respondent's garden, on 19-3-1959. The respondent is the owner of an estate bearing S. Nos. 113/1, and 113/2 in Ammathi village, South Coorg. He had raised orange trees on an extent of 11.93 acres in these survey numbers and they were bearing fruits. The appellant is the owner of Survey No. 135 of the same village. The said land is adjacent to the garden land belonging to the respondent referred to above. It is alleged that on the afternoon of 19-3-1959, the appellant set fire to his land in order to burn the stumps of the trees which he had cut for the purpose of preparing the land for planting coffee plants; that the appellant had not taken necessary precautions before he set fire and as a result of it, the fire spread into the garden of the respondent and burnt about 3,600 fruit bearing orange trees. It is alleged that the appellant, his clerk and a servant who were present at the spot, made some attempts to quench the fire that was rapidly spreading into the respondent's garden hut in vain. Having come to know of this, the respondent lodged a complaint with the police to the effect that the appellant had, by his negligent act, committed an offence punishable under Section 435 of the Indian Penal Code. The police, after investigation, submitted a 'B' report. The revenue authorities visited the spot at the request of the respondent on 21-3-1959 and drew up a mahazar estimating the damages caused to the respondent and recommended his case to the Government for compensation. The respondent alleged that it is due to the careless and negligent act of the appellant in having set fire to his land without taking necessary precautions, that, it spread into his garden and destroyed the fruit bearing orange trees and, therefore, the appellant was liable to pay him damages. He estimated the damages at RS. 6,000/-. The respondent issued a notice to the appellant demanding a sum of Rs. 6,000/- towards damages on account of the destruction of fruit-bearing trees standing in his garden. The appellant sent a reply denying his liability. Therefore, the respondent filed a suit for recovery of the sum of Rs. 6,000/- towards damages caused to him on account of the appellant's negligence in not taking necessary precautions to prevent the fire that he started in his land from spreading into the respondent's land. The appellant totally denied his responsibility for the damages done to the respondent's garden. He denied that he set fire to his land on the 19th of March, 1959, to burn the stumps of the trees that he had cut. He further denied that 3,600 fruit bearing trees standing in the land of the respondent were destroyed on account of the fire and put the respondent to prove all these allegations. Incidentally, he suggested that the fire which destroyed some trees in the estate of the respondent came from somebody else's land and it was purely "accidental" and that it spread into the respondent's orange garden, which was in a dilapidated condition, in spite of his attempts to quench the fire with the assistance of his servants.

(3.) On these allegations the learned District Judge framed the following issues: