RANGANAYAKI AMMAL Vs. P SIVASUBRAMANIAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE suit for permanent injunction having been only partly decreed and no change having been made in the appeal, the plaintiffs, aggrieved, have come up with this second appeal.

(2.) THE subject matter of the suit is a wall. THE plaintiffs' house in Purasawalkam bearing Door No. 49 is on the north while the defendants' house bearing Door No. 50 is on the south. THE case of the plaintiffs is that the construction of a portion of the ground floor and a portion of the first floor of their house was put up by their grand-father. Subsequent to that, in 1929, the defendants' ancestors constructed the defendants' building. In paragraph 7 of the plaint the plaintiffs seem to say that in 1949 the plaintiffs' father and the defendants' father agreed to treat the southern wall as common wall, but it is not stated whose is that northern wall, whether it is the plaintiffs' wall or the defendants' wall. And then it is stated that acting on the said agreement the plaintiffs' father put up further construction. THE further case of the plaintiffs is that while so the defendants started demolishing their building and while doing so they are demolishing the said common wall alone without any notice or information to the plaintiffs. THEy would not heed to any protest by the plaintiffs. THE defendants may dig the earth to a depth of 10 feet adjacent to the plaintiffs' building and this may lead to developing cracks in the plaintiffs building. THE defendants have no right to demolish the common wall which was being enjoyed by both parties for more than 40 years, and if it is demolished it will cause damage to the southern side of the plaintiffs' building, and the plaintiffs will also lose safety and privacy in the use of the building. On these grounds the plaintiffs have prayed for injunction restraining the defendants from demolishing the said common wall.