V POO RAJAH Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to restore the wet lands bearing Survey Nos. 10/1 and 10/2 in Patta Nos. 585 and 662 to an extent of 64 cents in Agaram Village of Eral Firkka, Srivaikundam Taluk in Tuticorin District to its original condition and to direct respondents 2 to 4 to provide adequate compensation for the thirty trees uprooted by trespassing into the land.

(2.) THE factual matrix as culled out from the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are as under:Petitioner-s versionTHE property in Survey Nos. 10/1 and 10/2 having an extent of 64 cents in Agaram Village of Eral Firkka, Srivaikundam belongs to the petitioner and his father and four brothers. However, the property was managed by the petitioner. THE entire extent of property was developed into a coconut grove and the petitioner has planted 60 coconut saplings initially and all the saplings came out well and started giving substantial income in view of their situation near a channel.

(3.) HOWEVER respondents 3 and 4 and their men were able to accomplish their purpose of trespass into the property of the petitioner and to form a road through his property by uprooting thirty out of sixty coconut trees. The said incident took place in the early hours of 6.7.1999 and all the thirty trees fell on the ground and the earth was also dug by 5 to 6 feet below the ground level and the entire stretch of the patta land had been dug and destroyed. The damage caused on account of the unlawful act of respondents 3 and 4 and their men were heavy. According to the petitioner the damaged coconut trees were yielding about 300 nuts per tree every year and they have been selling at Rs. 5/- per nut and they were also getting a decent income of Rs. 45,000/- per annum from the trees. Because of the illegal and unwarranted action resorted to by respondents 3 and 4 along with their men, the petitioner lost the valuable coconut trees and the value of the property was also diminished. Aggrieved by the said action of the respondents, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition.Defence