MANIKKAM Vs. KAMALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When branches of trees overhang the neighbouring soil, can any right accrue, over the land over which they hang, or, to the overhanging itself, by reason of the length of time these branches having been hanging over that land. This is the short question that arises for consideration in this appeal by the defendants.

(2.) The plaintiff and the defendant, two women, owners of adjoining lands, unfortunately do not see eye to eye with each other. Admittedly, the branches of the trees standing on the defendant's land are spreading and jutting out above the property owned by the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed the suit complaining that the branches of these trees extending over her land caused nuisance preventing her from constructing any building or using the water in her well.

(3.) The Trial Court found that these branches have been overhanging for about 50 years and that the neighbouring land-owner has no right by way of easement to allow the trees in her property to overhang the property of the adjoining land-owner. Even then, it did not give a decree in favour of the plaintiff holding that the claim was vague in the sense that the plaintiff did not describe where exactly the branches of the defendant's trees were overhanging on the plaintiff's property.