LOGAMBAL ALIAS THANGACHI AMMAL Vs. VAITHINATHA IYER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The lower Appellate Court has found that no nuisance or inconvenience is caused to the plaintiff by reason of the drain constructed by the defendants. The contention that the construction of the drain was such a violation of the plaintiff s rights as co-owner of the lane marked "M" as would entitle him to an injunction independently of any proved nuisance, is in direct conflict with Shamnuggar Jute Factory Co. Ltd. v. Ram Narain Chatterjee 14 C. 189 and Mohanchand Nemchand Gujar v. Isakbhai Tanaji 2 Bom. L.R. 898 : 25 B. 248 and, in our opinion, is unsustainable.

(2.) We will protect the appellant s rights to be safeguarded against the possibility of nuisance by ordering that the drain throughout its course should be covered over so as to prevent any nuisance to the plaintiff.

(3.) With this modification, the second appeal is dismissed with costs.