VISWANATHAN Vs. PORICHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petition is at the instance of a counter petitioner in an application for injunction which has been allowed by the courts below. The injunction sought for was to restrain the demolition of the walls or pillars of the shop building in the possession of the revision petitioner and against carrying out any new works therein or effecting any material alterations to the building and from committing waste.

(2.) The building was taken on rent from one Saraswathi Amma by one Gopalan. Gopalan passed away in 1965. The revision petitioner claims to be have-entered into a tenancy direct with Saraswathi Amma thereafter. It is not disputed that the revision petitioner is now in possession of the building. The plaintiff is a person who purchased the building under a sale deed dated 29-7-1971. The sale deed itself refers to the tenancy. Among the various recitals therein are the statements:

(3.) The building is a shop room dealing in sale of wrist watches, the name of the concern being, 'The Kerala Watch Company'. The building had only wooden split shutters in its front. They were replaced by rolling shutters in 1959. Insecurity was intensely felt, according to the revision petitioner, having regard to the frequent thefts committed in and around the area, by breaking open the rolling shutters. Naturally, having regard to the articles kept in the shop room, every precaution had to be taken by the owner of such costly merchandise. According to him, in order to prevent pilferage of the costly watches, he wanted to affix a collapsible shutter. This had to be fastened to two iron posts fixed on the two sides. It is stated that the collapsible shutters could be removed at any time without in any way causing any damage to the building, (vide Para.4 of the written statement).