SINNANA GOWNDEN Vs. VEERAPPA GOWNDEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case, we trust, has now reached its final stage. The late Chief Justice and Mackay, J., who heard the Letters Patent appeal from the Judgment of Phillips, J., called for findings in a short order which runs thus: We direct that findings be recorded by the District Munsif on the following points: (1) Has the plaintiff recently raised the level of his land so as to cast an additional burden on the defendant's land? (2) Is the plaintiff entitled to discharge through the point R (a) drainage water from the house; and (b) water drawn from the well for washing purposes and thereafter thrown on the defendant's land?

(2.) This order does not bring out, we understand, that the dispute relates also to rain-water which collects on the plaintiff's land. Before the partition, the two plots of land were owned by a common proprietor. The land on which the plaintiff's house stands is on a higher level. The defendant owns the adjacent house on the lower land. Subsequent to the partition, a wall was built between the houses jointly by the two owners. It was in that wall that an opening was made at the point R referred to in the order of the Bench.

(3.) I may mention that this opening was made at the time when the wall itself was constructed.