PONNUSAMY Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE unsuccessful plaintiffs before the courts below, concurrently, are the appellants.

(2.) THE appellants/plaintiffs for themselves and as representatives of ayacutdars of Mandalamanikkam Tank have filed a suit for permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from putting up any kind of construction, dam or anicut or bund or otherwise, across of river Gundar, either at Tiruchuli Anaikulam or anywhere on the grounds that Anaikulam Tank is not entitled to receive any water from Gundar, since Anaikulam Tank has its own immemorial source of supply from Kanal Odai, that if any dam is built up that will diminish and deprive the right enjoyed by the plaintiffs, causing irreparable loss and damage and that the Government is not entitled to make any diversion of water, detrimental to the interest of the local right of the plaintiffs, which they have acquired under common law, available to them inherently also, in addition to certain other grounds.

(3.) THIS court, while admitting the second appeal, had formulated the following substantial questions of law for consideration in this second appeal: " (1)Whether the suit is barred by Section 4 of the tamil Nadu Act 19 of 1949? (2)Whether River Kunder is an authorised source or accustomed source of supply to Anaikulam Tank and the mamool supply of the river could be impounded and diverted to the prejudice of the appellants as lower riparian owners?"