M. GANESAN Vs. N.P. RENGASAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Criminal Revision Case against the order of the learned Revenue Divisional Officer and Ex -Officio Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli, directing the removal of one coconut tree in S.F. No. 66/1 of Allur village, Tiruchi Taluk, on the ground that it is leaning over the pathway and the adjacent house and that it is likely to cause imminent danger to the by -passers and the residents of the adjacent house. The coconut tree in question is said to be leaning over the property of one. N.P. Rengasamy, the respondent herein. Coconut trees leaning like the tower of Pisa is not an extraordinary sight. Like other trees, coconut trees also very often lean on one side or the other. The fruits of the trees are periodically plucked by the owner of the trees, and therefore, there is very little possibility of the fruits falling on the head of the passer -by or the neighbours residing within the area over which the tree is leaning. There are millions of coconut trees in South India, and yet I have not heard of a coconut falling on the head of any human being while he is passing through the coconut tope. That is because as I said earlier, the fruits are plucked periodically. Even in cyclones when coconut trees are known to fall, they have not fallen on the heads of human beings.

(2.) THIS coconut tree, which has been in existence for over 30 years and more, has been producing fruits or should have been producing fruits at least for the last 20 years, and yet not one instance of a coconut falling on the head of any human being or animal or any of the products of the tree falling on the head of any human being or on the house of the neighbour has been brought to the notice of the learned Revenue Divisional Officer -cum -Ex -Officio Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli, who passed the order now impugned before me or the Executive Magistrate who have passed similar orders earlier, which have been set aside by this Court. Therefore, the opinion of the learned Magistrate that the tree is an imminent danger is not based either on any acceptable evidence or taking into consideration the normal and natural course of events.

(3.) THEREFORE , the order of the learned Revenue Divisional Officer and Ex -Officio Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tiruchirapalli, is set aside. This revision case is allowed.